Longmont City Council – Regular Session – January 24, 2022
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.
Read along below:
Unknown Speaker 18:22
Hello Can you hear me
Unknown Speaker 18:30
Can you hear me
Unknown Speaker 19:02
you hear me
Unknown Speaker 19:21
please feel free to do so. The the council meeting is being live streamed you can watch it in three different ways you can go to the Longmont colorado.gov Online Services agendas and minutes and pull the meeting up there. You can also watch our YouTube channel at Longmont, YouTube. It’s also being streamed through the Longmont Public Media website. Long mountain public media.org forward slash watch. And also on Comcast channels eight and eight ad. May we ever roll call please.
Unknown Speaker 19:56
Absolutely. Mayor Peck present councilmember Duggal fairing Your councilmember Martin Here. Councilmember McCoy, present. Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez Here. Councilmember waters, and Councilmember Yarbro. Here. Mayor, you have a quorum.
Unknown Speaker 20:11
Thank you. Let’s stand for the pledge.
Unknown Speaker 20:17
pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Unknown Speaker 20:32
Anyone wishing to speak at first cop public invited to be heard, will need to add his or her name to the list outside the council chambers and only those on the list will be invited to speak at the first public invited to be heard. speakers who do not place their names on the list will have the opportunity to speak during final call public invited to be heard, and anyone wishing to speak on a second reading or public hearing item. You’re asked to add your name to the speaker list for each particular item. And each speaker is limited to three minutes. Please state your name and address. We need to approve our December 20 20 to 2022 regular session minutes. So that’s been Moved by Councillor water seconded by Councillor McCoy. Let’s vote.
Unknown Speaker 21:30
didn’t either? Yes, let’s verbalize all those in favors. Raise your hand and all those opposed. So that passes unanimously.
Unknown Speaker 21:48
We are now at the gender revisions in submissions of documents. Are there any council members that would like to submit a document for an upcoming council meeting? Councillor waters?
Tim Waters 22:02
Thank you, Mayor pack? No, I do not have a document to submit. But I do have motion directs staff. Of course. Let me just clarify, Harold, I think for between you and Jim, in talking about the royalty royalties that are acute accruing. That would have been paid to oil and gas operators. For those to be used in ways other than going back into funds. Would we cry with change in financial policy? Is that correct? I think that was the advice I got from Jim,
Unknown Speaker 22:38
Jim and Eugene jump in this because I think and some of the cases there are legal issues.
Tim Waters 22:44
Well, let me let me let me make the motion. And then we can you can sort this out later. The motion is to direct staff to bring back whatever changes would need to be made in our financial policies that would allow discretion of this council to direct those $3 million dollars to something other than just reverting back into the into to the city fund. The point here is Council discretion to direct those funds and the change in the policy to make that happen or allow that to happen. I have a second motion after this.
Unknown Speaker 23:16
So that’s good move by Councillor waters and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez that the $3 million that we have from the oil and gas royalties be allow counsel to have discretion on how those are disbursed. Is there any discussion? Do we have up here? Councillor McCoy Okay, Councillor Hidalgo fairing Are you on this or for something else?
Unknown Speaker 23:49
Well, I did initially put it for something else but I do have I would like to hear okay okay are you know I would like to hear with what Jim golden has to stay before I vote on any kind of motion Yeah, he seems surprised
Unknown Speaker 24:23
it could be Eugene.
Unknown Speaker 24:31
Pepper members of counsel Jim Gould, Chief Financial Officer. I’m looking at Eugene as well. I think it’s it’s I guess if you look into the Chief Financial Officer for an answer you can you can change your financial policies is a question I think of whether we believe that we can redirect some of those monies from the the to the open space fund in the water fund that own that property and be receiving that and so I’m gonna defer to Eugene from the mayor and council, Eugene Bay City Attorney, I’d prefer to address it in a confidential email to you. And I can get that to you later this week.
Unknown Speaker 25:15
Everyone in queue, are you in the queue for this discussion? Okay? No. Okay. Councillor waters?
Tim Waters 25:25
Thanks, Mayor pack. When you do that, when you draft that memo, it will be really helpful for me, for you to explain how it would be okay to send $3 million to oil and gas operators, but not to other city needs. Right, that would be required that it go back into that to the water fund and the open space fund, since it was gonna go to oil and gas, and that we would be constrained? Or wouldn’t, we couldn’t find a way to create the discretion of the council to direct those funds. So if there’s a legal constraint, I’ll be, I’d be very anxious to know, but I’m gonna want I’m gonna if either, and if you don’t provide an email, I’ll ask that question here. Why could we send it to oil and gas and couldn’t use it for other purposes in the interest of the city? So I have another motion? Should I log out and then log back in?
Unknown Speaker 26:15
No, we need to vote. I know.
Tim Waters 26:16
I know. If there are no more comments, I’ll just leave my microphone on because I have another motion. Oh,
Unknown Speaker 26:21
okay. Do you you don’t? Do you have a question? Counselor? Can you turn on your microphone?
Unknown Speaker 26:36
Okay. It may be that the answer is more complex than yes or no, it may be that some of the funds can be redirected. As long as the council is told in this postulated discussion, what we have at our discretion or the reasons why not? If? If not, then it seems like that’s something that I can support. Without, you know, knowing what the outcome of this discussion is going to be. That’s why we need to have a discussion. Just understanding that it’s not necessarily going to be an up or down thing for the whole 3 million.
Unknown Speaker 27:18
Yeah, without playing attorney, I think there are different components you have property that are that’s owned by enterprise funds, and you have property that’s owned by General Fund. The general fund is a pretty straightforward answer if the general fund contributed it. That is a pretty straightforward answer. The question that Eugene has to answer is related to the revenue derived that’s owned by properties that are owned by enterprise funds in the open open spaces and an enterprise fund, but it’s separate fund.
Unknown Speaker 27:55
So Eugene, in that confidential email, I would like you to explain the different speakers, Councillor water said, why would we pay 3 million but those those are, we’re going to be royalties that we received that we were going to pay back. So what I would like to know is if we did not make the contract, a contractual agreement to pay those royalties back to oil and gas. Where would they have gone anyway, from the very start when we got those royalties? Those normally wouldn’t have been up to council discretion. Were they so would you address the that in your email? Okay, so we need to vote on this motion. Okay, Councillor Hidalgo?
Unknown Speaker 28:50
Can we put this vote on hold? So until we get the email from Eugene? So that’s what I would cause because I would like to know before I vote yes or no, I I’d like to know exactly what what my vote would implicate.
Unknown Speaker 29:12
I guess we would the way I understand that is before we before we vote on the discretionary funds, we need to know if they are able to be discretionary.
Unknown Speaker 29:26
So that’s up to you Councillor waters, this is your motion. Okay. Let’s go I’m not getting it. So this is going to be could be let’s do a voice vote. All those in favor of the motion.
Unknown Speaker 30:05
So all those in favor? All those opposed? So that passes. She didn’t say she Keaton’s vote, she was EA. Okay, so that passes with Councillor waters Councillor Martin? Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez and Councillor Yarbro it as a yay vote and Councillor McCoy, Councillor Hidalgo fairing and Mayor Pakka. No. Councillor waters.
Tim Waters 30:37
Thanks, Mayor Peck. On November 29, we accepted. We approved a donation from the sewer Family Foundation to support operations and development of the museum. That was a provocation for me to work on a resolution I brought back to Council for consideration. I moved to direct staff to bring that back. I was asked to delay until January which I agreed to do and I understood then what was going to how this was going to play out I would not have agreed then. So given that I am now offering a motion making a motion to direct staff to return for council consideration. The resolution I drafted that this council has seen it’s been presented publicly for council consideration at the next regular council meeting.
Unknown Speaker 31:31
So it’s been Moved by Councillor waters seconded by Councillor Martin, that we bring back his his resolution on the well it was the museum a resolution on the museum and how that would be funded. So is there any discussion on this? Let’s vote? No. I’m opening it up for discussion. There was a second it was Councillor Martin. That’s where I got confused as well. Is there any discussion on this? Councillor Donald fearing?
Unknown Speaker 32:07
Okay. And this is just to bring it back for us to vote on. I’m okay with that. Yeah, and then I’ll reserve the conversation at a later time.
Unknown Speaker 32:21
I’m okay with it. Also, as long as we get before you bring it back for consideration because I didn’t hear that there was any date certain. Rick, Eugene, is there any possibility that we could have that letter before then as well? Because that resolution encompassed all those dollars? Yes, Mayor, we probably planning on getting it out this week.
Unknown Speaker 32:49
Okay, thank you. All right. I see no other discussion, let’s vote. And once again, I don’t have it. So let’s do a voice vote.
Unknown Speaker 33:03
Okay, all those in favor? Aye. Aye. All those opposed? So that passes unanimously. Councillor McCoy.
Unknown Speaker 33:13
Thank you, Mr. Peck. I’d like to add to the revision agenda to ask that we started discussion to create a community named change committee in the effort to find an appropriate name change for the following city streets, Mount Evans drive Mount Evans place and Mount Evans Street, as prompted by the state of Colorado’s decision to replace the name of Mount Evans to mount blue sky. I feel that this that we as a community leaders should not wait until our community members are outraged due to the due to a tone deafness or and a serious lack of cultural sensitivity to react. I think that change of names should be appropriate. Like when we change the name of human drive to sunrise in 2005.
Unknown Speaker 34:05
All right, that’s been Moved by Councillor McCoy seconded by Councillor Hidalgo fairing. It’s open for discussion. Councillor Hidalgo fairing? Oh, I’m sorry. That was Councillor waters.
Tim Waters 34:19
Thanks, Mayor Peck. Could you just talk a little bit more about you mentioned the committee who would organize who would chair kind of operationally how are you envisioning this motion would be implemented? Sorry.
Unknown Speaker 34:36
In the past, I spoke with through email, Sandy cedar. And in the past, we had a process for doing that. And I suspect that we could probably, you know, take that process and apply it here. Maybe Sandy, if you have any input on that maybe you can give what what counts waters is asking for.
Unknown Speaker 35:05
Thank you, Mayor Peck members of council Sandy cedar assistant city manager. You know, we went back and took a look as last time we did this with with was with Shillington drive. You may may or may not remember that we did a name change of Shillington drive quite a few years ago. And we did have a neighborhood conversation with folks. You know, I think it came up several times, we had several meetings that identified the cost of what that might be, we worked with the neighbors, and then we went through that planning process to make that change. Once everybody had decided that that’s really what needed to happen. But there was there was Resident input. There was certainly a lot of conversation about what it would cost those residents to change their address, et cetera. So we do have a process through community neighborhood resources that works with planning and development services in order to make sure that it’s it’s a clear process, we’d be happy to bring it back since the motion is to put it on the agenda. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 36:05
Okay. All right. So looks like oh, you’re all lit up.
Unknown Speaker 36:14
Thank you, Mr. Peck. I’ve heard grumblings about some other potential renaming issues. So I would just like to maybe suggest that the motion include review of any particular troublesome names for renaming issues. I’m not sure if anybody else has seen some of what I’ve seen, but there’s some other ones that I’ve heard that might be coming before the city council. And so maybe having that process play out at the same time, instead of having it come up multiple times would be helpful.
Unknown Speaker 36:51
Unknown Speaker 36:52
I think that’s an excellent idea. And that’s the sort of spirit in which this is presented.
Unknown Speaker 37:00
So do you want to amend the motion to include that or? You did? Okay. All right. No more a discussion in the queue. Let’s vote. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? So that passes unanimously. So I have, okay, counselor, I go very, excuse me. So
Unknown Speaker 37:26
I do want to make a motion to direct staff to determine the exact cost of a multipurpose dome built within an area of 175,000 square foot area and bring back in amount for ongoing costs. And after discussion with these two departments, children’s youth and families along with recreation department, what they would need in order to oversee the facility. And that would be my motion. So do I have a second?
Unknown Speaker 37:58
Okay, okay. That’s my counselor, excuse me, Hidalgo fairing to direct staff to look at the operational cost citing whatever it would cost to get a 750 foot dome. And that was 50,000 square foot dome. Yes. 750,000 square foot dome, or what staff seems applicable in the cost of that.
Unknown Speaker 38:24
I would like to speak to my motion.
Unknown Speaker 38:26
Just a moment. It’s been seconded by Councillor McCall. Yes. So any discussion in the queue is Councillor Martin, but Councillor dunkel theory before?
Unknown Speaker 38:36
Yeah, before people start weighing in, I do want to speak to my motion. So I had been in ongoing conversation with the Children’s youth and families I am the liaison to the city, the youth council. And, you know, because this money is supposed to go to youth, I elicited a lot of feedback from our our teens and school aged children, your as a teacher, we were able to have that capacity to to get the survey out to my colleagues and they were able to have discussions within their classrooms as well. And with the families that they know the problem that has been coming again and again and I’ve seen this happen within our school system, are not necessarily the high achieving the kids that have those goals in mind that they’re out there. They’re they’re in competitive sports are doing great job. They. The issue is you have and this is coming from a personal I have a son with autism and he’s and he’s gotten in trouble with the law in the past where we need an outlet for kids who have the system has failed them. You know that we have failed them in some way shape or form that they can have a connection with you center with people who are who are highly educated and highly in know how to reach out you know, we have some phenomenal staff, we just need a space for them to go to. A concern that I’ve heard from staff from children’s Youth and Family is that there’s no facility, there’s no place, they have the Youth Center, which is very small. They have, even when we try to host sister cities, they didn’t have the youth didn’t have a place to shower. If we build this right, in conversations I’ve had with Christina Pacheco, we could have a locker room area where our sister City’s youth can come out and they can use that space that is our own. The other piece is having the opportunity for our youth, our youth center staff, to network with kids to get them out and finding productive play and productive activities for them to do. The issue that I heard in my years of being on on youth council is there’s no space there having to go to depend on classrooms or other building facilities. So that was the feedback I received from, from some staff in that in that regard. And, you know, there’s ways that we could go around hours of operation, you know, there’s, there’s lots of opportunity that we could bring down ongoing operational costs, but I just need staff to be able to have the time to thoroughly research this. In conversations I’ve had with Harold, he’s anticipating, you know, he kind of through an estimate of maybe 10 hours, you know, I don’t want something super in depth, but just to give us a ballpark figure. You know, I, I know that you know, and I’m the liaison to the museum. So I don’t want it I don’t want it to sound like I’m not in support of the museum. I am. However, we have some kids. And we’re seeing it over and over again with the crime that we’re experiencing in our communities, that and it’s coming from our youth, and we need to help get them on the right track and council, Councilmember Yarborough and I really feel that this would be a place a safe space, that we can give them the supports, and provide staff that need that they would need to help them make some good life choices.
Unknown Speaker 42:24
Counselor, um, Martin.
Unknown Speaker 42:28
Thank you, Mayor Peck. First of all, I want to say that the council members it all go fairing and Yarbro did an excellent job of making the need case for a recreational gathering maybe even counseling facility located on the northeast side, and that I fully support both the need and the case. What I don’t support is the idea that that the conclusion of of a dome as the specific format for this place is is related to the need case in any firm way. And and because of that, I don’t think that 10 hours is appropriate. It might it might be 10 hours to figure out how much a dome would cost, but whether the dome is the right solution, and whether it is you know, the right investment of maintenance costs. All of that is a different thing. And I well, I think we have a very urgent need for a facility such as the need case described. You know, the dome, we haven’t we haven’t done any assessment of available spaces that could be used in the city. And I’m sure it was not done with perfect information about what those spaces what those existing spaces are. We it just isn’t ready to assign that much money to and especially ongoing costs too. I do understand the urgency of the need. I believe that this should be something that is discussed in depth at the retreat and that a reasonable and much larger amount of staff time or perhaps some consulting time be allocated to it instead because I just don’t believe that it’s hasty. So I am not going to vote for the motion in its present form. But I am in favor of the general idea.
Unknown Speaker 44:44
Tim Waters 44:46
Thanks, Mayor pack. Just to be clear, this is a motion not to bring something back. But direct to direct staff. Is that correct? Tonight? It would be I would have it would be more persuasive or helpful if the group’s that had been consulted on this would have included our parks and rec advisory board. For me, this isn’t really isn’t a question about costs, we have $18 million of a backlog in our budgeted and capital improvement budgets over years that have accrued to the point where we have an $18 million backlog to get Parks and Rec projects out the door or fully developed. For me to vote yes, on this, I would have to know that the parks Advisory Board would put put this above its take something out that’s already prioritized, and for which we budgeted in to replace something else with this because it’s we have the money to do this. That’s not a question. The question is, where does it fall in relationship to all the things because everything that’s in that backlog is at least to some degree in that backlog, right? It’s been approved for the very same reasons that you’ve offered for serving the whole community, but youth in particular. So the idea of doing more and better for our kids is spot on. To not have the folks who we’ve asked to advise us on these kinds of projects, recreation projects, to not even be consulted, puts me in a position to say I’m not going to vote for this, not because I don’t think kids deserve the best we can do. But we’ve got plenty of money to do a lot for kids. We just have the reason we can’t get that out the door now. Our staffing issues.
Unknown Speaker 46:39
Counselor Yarborough? Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 46:50
Okay. Um, okay. So the main thing is, as we asked for for first time is to get staff we need to direct staff to get the information so that we can see what was reasonable. This proposal is staffs recommendation for what they see and what they need, not what a counselor had done. Oh, fairing and myself. We have done the survey we have asked. We I totally agree with you, counselor waters we we had just freezer at the meeting. And we had Christina Pacheco at the meeting, to talk about the needs. And that’s where we got the information of the needs for our youth, they need more space. We’re not trying to pull, you know, bring something quick. Bam. Thank you, ma’am. That’s not what we’re trying to do. We are trying to extend the services for the youth center for these kids in particularly in a neighborhood where kids can just really walk to that area and get those services from the Youth Center right next to the youth center that’s already there. And that is why we chose that area. And that’s fine. It’s open for negotiation. We just need them to give us information so we can see what’s reasonable. And with the needs, within the center, that is all we’re trying to do. And we cannot get past that for some reason. I’m not we’re not trying to take away parking wrecks. I think that’s a really good idea to have park and rec center to no problem. We want to work together it’s for us. It’s not for me, not for her is how we can better our community with the youth and provide opportunities for them to make better choices within the community. And that’s really what we want.
Unknown Speaker 48:58
Seeing no one else in the queue. I think that looking at this and putting the cost and services is comparable to a brick and mortar place, or expanding the use center may be more much different, much more affordable. And the direction is just to let staff look into it with no timeline, whether it’s 10 hours or 15 hours of work. That’s not our call. That’s that’s the operations call staffs call. So I will be voting for this. Is there any other discussion? Seeing none, let’s vote. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? So Councillor waters, Councillor Martin are opposed to directing staff to look at the possibility of the dome. Councillor McCoy Councillor Hidalgo faring? Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez and myself voted for and counselor, your counselor Yarbro sorry, across the world so, do you need anything more from that done? Okay, so I have emotional so I moved to a lot 100 $100,000 from the Broncos US dollars to L LV Longmont late next Latinx voices per their presentation and submitted business plan. Okay, so I made that motion to a lot that money from the Broncos US dollars to llv. And it’s been seconded by Councillor McCoy, open up for discussion counselor, I’m going to try to call on your counselor Martin. But it seems like every time I push this button, it goes to the different person. So we’ll see if it works.
Unknown Speaker 50:53
Thank you in your packet looks like it works. I have received other requests. One of them came in in a timely fashion according to what we directed to and the person was misdirected. So his proposal was not received another person seeing that it was going to be reconsidered, in fact to other people seeing that it was going to be reconsidered. Subsequent to the last Council meeting where these ideas were presented, also said what do I do about making an application for this windfall money. If we’re going to be awarding windfall money to organizations of residence, we should have some rules. It shouldn’t be that you just get it because you were first in line. It shouldn’t be that you should just get it because somebody likes the idea. Because frankly, of the three, you know, I only like one of them. And I don’t think it’s the most urgent need we have I’d go with the youth center on the site. Frankly, that’s what I think the most urgent need is. But I think that we need fairness. We need accountability in the sense that if we’re awarding a significant amount of money, we need to have some type of oversight and some thorough documentation of how the money is going to be spent and how the organization that’s going to suspend it to spend it is going to perpetuate. And I don’t think just as I didn’t think that an effective requirements process for the dome had been carried out or could be carried out in the amount of time that was suggested. I don’t think we have such a process. And I think awarding it now would be extremely unfair. And I don’t want to see it happen. So I will not be voting for this.
Unknown Speaker 53:05
So counsel waters before I call on you, I just want to make at our council meeting, and I think it was December 27 that we put a timeline that applications would be that would be the timeline for them. Unfortunately, that’s not what the paper reported. So when they reported the Bronco money, they did not report what was stated at the council meeting that we were going to put a timeline for applications. So counselor waters.
Tim Waters 53:36
Thanks, Mr. Peck. Let me just clarify the motion. Your motion is to actually authorize tonight not to bring something back? Correct. I’m gonna vote against that, because I might have voted to bring it back. Here’s here’s that with the specific proposal. I understand I think I understand what’s driving it. The part of the proposal that I’m concerned about is the request for $50,000.25. Just to go in a bank account, and 25,000 to support fundraising. So I would ask you for every nonprofit in town that serves women in need children in needs, safe shelter, you name it, that also needs $50,000 to support their fundraising or 25 to support the fundraising of 25 that go in the bank for for and endowment. What would be the constraints? What would be the message to them? Should they get in line income with the same proposal? That’s a question and I want to make a statement. For my proof from my perspective, we don’t have much discretion. I haven’t gone through by five budget cycles. I appreciate the times. A couple times late in the budget cycle we’ve been told there’s some one time on allocated money. You have discretion as council over what to do with that. But it’s generally pretty late. It doesn’t happen every year didn’t happen this year. But it has happened in a couple of years. We all when we when we approved the for $414 million budget on October, whatever our last meeting in October was added, we didn’t have discretion over a single dollar. In that budget. Now, we reviewed the proposals and the dollars are well spent. I I’m not questioning any of that. But there, but what we do is listen to nod and with zero discretion. For me, here comes potentially I don’t know, what’s what we’ll see we get from Eugene, with royalty income, and and not speculating the money from the the windfall from the sale of Broncos. I appreciate, you know, inviting public applications or proposals. I just don’t understand why we would forego one time as elected officials who are elected to do this to allocate resources to give up our discretion to allocate those resources, as we think we should. And I understand what you’re proposing tonight, is that right? But but when it goes to processes and applications and who else gets in line, which is I think what’s going to happen with this, it should every nonprofit in town should come and ask us for $50,000 If we approve that part of this proposal.
Unknown Speaker 56:24
So a lot of the nonprofits that you mentioned are under the housing and Human Services and apply for grants through through that. And not all of them are specifically for youth. And that’s the difference in that. But for the people in the audience what what LVB llv nonprofit is asking for it is it is also on the basis of what Councillor Yarbro and Councillor Hidalgo fearing are addressing, they put this and they were talking to me long before the Broncos money came out the discrepancy in the socio economic part of our population, our residents whose children are not allowed to participate and allowed is not the correct word they are allowed, who cannot financially participate in sports. Regardless of what sports they are, whether it’s swimming or Tennis or Football, basketball, baseball, whatever it is, male, female, it doesn’t make any difference, because of the rising costs of participating in the sports. So what they what their nonprofit is doing or wants to do is to buy the equipment and then rent it out to these kids. So that they will be able to participate the cost of equipment, the cost of shoes, the cost of bats, balls, tennis balls, goggles, it just escalates. So, many of them are not allowed to participate based upon their family and socio economic situation. So they are asking for dollars because these dollars are for youth to be able to purchase some of this equipment, they have a place to store it they etc. So that is why I’m moving this forward, because they would like the kids to be able to play this summer. And it takes quite a while to get all of that set up. They would like to do it before may get it all set up and ready to go. I think it’s aspirational. I think it is a good idea. I think it will move it will help our students in our kids. Counselor, Hidalgo fairing oops. Well, it looks like mayor pro teams I came on.
Unknown Speaker 58:58
Thank you, Mr. Peck, I would just like to say that, as far as this particular motion is concerned, I still have some troubles that Councilmember waters kind of voiced as well. I’m 100%, behind 50,000 for equipment. I’m like 75%, behind maybe the fundraising and then I’m 5050 on the other 25,000 to just stick in a bank account. I understand that I read the business proposal. And the logic behind that. What I don’t want to do is make piecemeal allocations of a large piece of a larger piece of money. So I won’t be in favor of that tonight. As I’ve, you know, had conversations with fellow council members. I was frustrated by the last time we had a conversation surrounding this topic and said that I’d rather just see all $980,000 Go to Children, Youth and Family Services and be done with it. That was my preference, but that’s not what the proposal. The proposal holes that have come in have been I’ve also been a little bit frustrated by the fact that there was miscommunication, I guess around the timelines, because I did agree that there was some merit to some of the other proposals that came in after the fact. So that’s why this continues to frustrate me. And so I won’t be voting for this. And I’m gonna, it’s gonna take a lot to get me to a comfortable place with some of the other proposals as well, which is why I did vote for the allocation of some staff time to get some real numbers surrounding the dome proposal. And I just want to make that clear before we take this vote. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:00:41
Okay. Counselor, Hidaka fairy.
Unknown Speaker 1:00:45
I would like to propose a friendly amendment to drop it to 50,000 that we would support the 50,000 I would rather be able to support something immediate that can get in the hands of our kids who most need it right away.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:04
I’ll accept that. Councillor McCoy. Nope. Try it again.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:14
As the second I agree with that, I think that’s a good approach. And I think that I hope that meets some of the expectations of some of that we’re concerned about having this dollars set aside for just putting in a bank account.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:33
Okay. Councillor Martin?
Unknown Speaker 1:01:36
Thank you, Mayor pack. I do agree with the idea of of dollars set aside, I think the objection was for fundraising primarily. That was the really scary part. But I still cannot get past and even if I am the lone no vote, I will be the lone no vote, because even though I approve of the sentiment and even of the plan, this is not fair. This is being you know, you don’t get to grab money just because it’s a windfall. You have to have, if really, you know, grant money to route to grassroots organizations, out of the budget cycle out of time, for even the best of reasons. Everybody’s reason thinks their own reasons are the best. We need to have a fair and equitable process that everybody understands. And I will defend this these actions, vociferously almost all the time, but I cannot defend this when the accusations that are going to come in come in. So I’m very sorry.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:45
Thank you, Councillor waters?
Tim Waters 1:02:52
Is there a reason why you want to do this tonight as opposed to direct staff to bring something back? So we could consider this. At the same time, not for the kind of process we went through, but actually cast a vote.
Unknown Speaker 1:03:07
I don’t know why we would want staff to look at it. I’m confused by that.
Tim Waters 1:03:13
Well, generally, when we’re here, and we’re giving direction, it’s generally to bring to move staff to bring things back to the agenda, which is what my motion was a bit ago, as opposed to taking an action. We did receive some materials. It hasn’t come through a council communication. It hasn’t had public review. No one who cares about the agenda would have had a chance to see this. I’m gonna vote no on the motion for those reasons, even though I might vote yes. On the amendment. But but the process you would like this? I mean, from
Unknown Speaker 1:03:45
Oh, would you like to amend the motion to direct staff to
Tim Waters 1:03:48
Well, I’ll let you do that. That’s not that’s fine.
Unknown Speaker 1:03:51
Okay, thank you. So I will amend the motion to direct staff to bring back on a the next regular session to consider a lobbying L L. V. $50,000. From the Broncos youth dollars.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:13
As the second I, I support that.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:16
Okay. I don’t see any further discussion. Let’s vote. All those in favor. All those opposed? So that looks like that passes unanimously. Thank you, everybody. We are now on our city manager’s report. Do you have anything for us, Harold?
Unknown Speaker 1:04:33
I do. Actually Mayor Council, as you all will recall, when we talked about the potential ballot items that we’re going to bring forward. In November, we talked about conducting a poll to assess the community’s appetite and support for all the projects that we listed. Sandy has reached out to and gotten quotes in terms of doing that work. As we talked about, we don’t Have any money budgeted for that. And so we were wondering if we could utilize up to $40,000 from Council contingency to pay for the polling on these projects. And also wanted to say Sandy’s gonna get a more detailed schedule out to council in the next day or so but we needed to, because tonight and then next week we have the lhsaa. We wanted to see if we could get direction on the council contingency for that polling.
Unknown Speaker 1:05:28
Unknown Speaker 1:05:33
Thank you, Mayor pack. I will move. The city manager said I think we should do that I would move to allocate the money
Unknown Speaker 1:05:43
that’s been Moved by Councillor Martin and seconded by Councillor Hidalgo fairing to allocate 40,000 to 40,000. From the council contingency plan to put together a survey on the upcoming bills in the legislature, is that right? No, no,
Unknown Speaker 1:06:04
this is for the ballot items on the recreate the Recreation Leisure,
Unknown Speaker 1:06:10
okay, I totally misunderstood that.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:13
And this is to take the items that we discussed with you all and get community feedback. This will be a scientific survey based on registered voters. And so that’s why the cost is different in terms of how we’re going to do this. So it’ll be statistically significant. Valid statistically, sorry.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:37
What the city manager said I moved that. Seeing this counselor Hidalgo, faring.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:44
So I do have one request. So at last was it last week or the week before it was last week, the end GLA the neighborhood groups leadership Association, I had a chance to talk to them a little bit about this process, what would be coming down, there wasn’t high interest in you know, wanting to tap with you all getting that survey, and they can assist with getting that survey out to their neighborhoods as well. So I think there’s a great opportunity for collaboration there.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:19
So this one’s going to be a little bit different. In that we want it to be a statistically valid survey, it’ll be random sampling. Okay. Okay. And so, first, it’s different than just putting out our normal surveys. Okay. So we’ll be working with a company that specializes in this. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:37
So yeah, just keep me informed. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:42
Seeing no ops, Councillor waters,
Tim Waters 1:07:44
just real quickly, thanks for your Will we have any input into this or get an idea of what their methodology is? And the questions are asking? Because I think what they asked and how they asked, it becomes really important in terms of what we learn.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:58
So part of we actually had a meeting today to talk about the questions we were going to ask and how we were going to ask it, Sandy and Becky Dwelle have a template, they’re actually going to reach out to the firm. Once we select them, we will get that information. We’ll we’ll we did talk about sending that to counsel. So you all can look at it.
Tim Waters 1:08:16
And I’m not suggesting we have a meeting here. But it would be if you just want some feedback, or to get an idea would be helpful to see the kinds of Koi, how they’re framed. What the themes are, if there are and then feedback, we have it directly to Sandy would be fine with me. I just, I’d like to not be surprised by when the survey goes out. And people start saying, why that question or why that you know, that question pattern? Ooh, question.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:40
Yeah, definitely. And we will also work with a different. So we have a lot of departments with advisory boards, timings is going to be a critical issue on this for us, because we want to get it out quickly. So we can get the results and then have a conversation with counsel based on that. So yeah, we can send it via email and get feedback.
Tim Waters 1:08:58
And it’s safe to assume that the results of that poll or the polling will seriously or substantially inform as we get into a decision making timeline. Correct. You know, what, what we should be considering as options,
Unknown Speaker 1:09:10
correct. And why we said up to $40,000, as we also said, you know, we’re looking not only at a phone pole, but a mailing pole, but then also the potential of maybe needing a second one, you know, based on what we get and what we settle on. So that shows that
Tim Waters 1:09:26
the last time we pulled is 10 seconds test Er, yeah. So
Unknown Speaker 1:09:31
we were looking at that and that we may need more money based on what we’re seeing. But thanks, approach.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:37
Seeing no one else in the queue for discussion, let’s vote. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? That passes unanimously, thank you. So now we’re at the special reports and presentations. We do have a proclamation. Do you have any presentations for council?
Unknown Speaker 1:09:58
I do not matter just the proclamation tonight.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:00
Thank you. So we have a proclamation designated January national radon action month. So, a proclamation designating January 1 through the 31st 2023 as national radon action month in Longmont, Colorado, whereas Radon is an invisible, odorless radioactive gas that threatens the health of our citizens and their families. And Radon is a leading environmental cause of cancer mortality in the US and the eighth leading cause of cancer mortality overall. And whereas the Colorado Rocky Mountain region has been marked, has been ranked zone one an area with the highest radon potential possible by the US Environmental Protection Protection Agency. In Colorado residential radon data has shown 50% of Colorado homes tested as being at or above the US Environmental Protection Agency’s radon action level. And whereas any home in Longmont may have elevated levels of radon and supporting recommended radon practices and policies to really reduce radon exposure is important to protect our community’s health and welfare. And whereas testing for radon is simple and inexpensive, and identified radon problems can be fixed. And whereas Boulder County Public Health, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, the US Environmental Protection Agency and the American Lung Association are supporting efforts to encourage Americans to test their homes for radon have elevated levels of radon reduced and have new homes built with radon resistant features. Now therefore, I don’t pick Mayor by virtue of the authority vested in me in the City Council of the City of Longmont do hereby proclaim the week of January 1 through the 31st 2023 as national radon action month in Longmont and I would like to invite Patty Dooley strip strip heli to receive this proclamation Do you have a few words you would like to say?
Unknown Speaker 1:12:07
Unknown Speaker 1:12:12
I’m Patty Dooley Scarpelli with Boulder County Public Health. I’m an environmental health specialist, and I thank you for your time and making this proclamation. Radon is a radioactive gas that causes lung cancer and lung cancer kills more people than breast, prostate and colon cancers combined. So it’s a serious cancer that is avoidable and testing for radon is easy and fixing it is also fairly simple. I appreciate your time and also thank you for listening and if anybody has any questions
Unknown Speaker 1:12:59
would you care to have a picture as we present this proclamation Do you
Unknown Speaker 1:13:05
really need one okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:09
Then I will just present it to you.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:33
We are now at first call public invited to be heard. I would like to call Tom Smith up first and remember that we would like to have your name and address and you have three minutes
Unknown Speaker 1:13:51
Good evening, Mayor Peck city council members. My name is Tom Smith. I live at 1049 champion circle. Excuse me. This evening. I am here to follow up on some information I shared with you previously. Particularly. I will address some process issues related to development and annexation that has come up before you previously, before I start that I do want to compliment the Jennifer Hewitt Apperson who’s the planner assigned to this project. She’s been very helpful cooperative in providing information to me and a number of the neighbors that I’m working with. I need some help as you know getting some answers and information over the last several months to information about zoning and different processes within the city. Very interesting that Councillor waters mentioned processes just a few minutes ago, and that is primarily what I need information on. I have fork Questions that all conveyed to you, I have them typed out, I will hand to city clerk Cantana, those questions as well as some other background information. And I will leave those to you for some home study if you would, rather than endure the entire time here in front of the group. The zoning processes really cropped up last week, as our neighborhood had a meeting at the Senior Center, our informational live stream, I was told had between 70 and 80 participants a couple of weeks ago, part of the process challenges you may know was that we got our notification meeting and excluded the time of the meeting and had an incorrect date on it. It took two weeks for that to be updated. And we got it I think four or five days corrected before the actual meeting. And that still got 7080 People are live gathering that people were able to get to. And it’s increasingly difficult to get a room in the city because there’s some repairs that Harold and many people know. We had a scheduled to get about 35 chairs in it. And we ended up with standing room only and Carlos at the Senior Center was able to round up some more tariffs for us. But the process of how the heck did this happen to us kept coming up and was certainly the dominant issue of people in our neighborhood. And the questions that came up were each of us or each of the people are asking, were you aware of these? How did this happen to us? Is and were the changes that were made consistent with what the city council wanted? Is this consistent with the advertising taking place in our neighborhood that is now showing homes for sale multifamily were previously in r1. And did the City Council know about the omissions and errors in the proposal? And how do we know if the zoning notifications were done properly? Kansas City Clerk Thank
Unknown Speaker 1:17:11
you Lance Whitaker.
Unknown Speaker 1:17:29
Unknown Speaker 1:17:36
mayor and council My name is Lance Whitaker live 1750 Collier street one One Colorado. Apparently a you an apology for last week’s outburst. A lot can be said about quitting smoking cigarettes. Last week was not a good week for me. This week’s now a very good week for me. It is National Peanut Butter day. So you all enjoy peanut butter and while it sticks to your mouth me also be aware that it is one of the few materials that carbon alignment can be aligned and that’s what you fake diamonds are made out of peanut butter. I’m glad to hear that mayor and council are well versed on the Declaration of Independence last week. Sitting on this side of the podium though, I sort of feel like Samuel Adams were as I want to make beer powers that be want me to make rum I neither one week from nor beer. But I do have a whole lot of other friends that well. We just like to have some fun too. And I hope you reconsider House Bill 191230 In appreciation for Samuel and his
Unknown Speaker 1:19:19
thank you let’s see no one no one else on the list. I would close public invited to be heard. We are now at the consent agenda. City Clerk Would you read the consent agenda by title into the record?
Unknown Speaker 1:19:36
Absolutely. Mayor Item nine A is resolution 2023 dash O for a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont and the city of Fort Collins for flex bus services. Nine B is resolution 2023 Dash oh five a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city and the victim assistance and law enforcement board of the 20 The Judicial District for 2023 grant funding for Victim Services. Nine C is resolution 2023 dash O six, a resolution of the Lamont City Council approving the Second Amendment to the 2021. intergovernmental agreement between the city and the city of Boulder for cost sharing for the use of overdrive downloadable digital media. 90 is resolution 2023 Dash oh seven a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving an agreement for economic development services with the Latino Chamber of Commerce of Boulder County and 90 is approved one capital improvement program amendment.
Unknown Speaker 1:20:34
Thank you, Don. Do councillors want to pull any items from the consent agenda? Seeing no one I move that the consent agenda as read Councillor McCoy was that
Unknown Speaker 1:20:59
the consent agenda item was moved by myself. seconded by Councillor McCoy. Let’s vote. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed. So that passes unanimously. We have ordinance on second reading and public hearings on any item the first one is a 02023 dash O two a bill for an ordinance amending chapter 2.20 of the Longmont municipal municipal code related to city departments. Are there any questions from Council on this ordinance? I would like to open the public comment on ordinance 2.0 to 320 23.0. To say no one from the audience who would like to speak on this I closed the public hearing. Can I have a motion on this ordinance?
Unknown Speaker 1:21:54
So moved. Second.
Unknown Speaker 1:21:56
It’s been moved by Councillor by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez seconded by Councillor Hidalgo fairing. Let’s vote. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? That passes unanimously, the second ordinance is 2023 Dash oh three, a bill for an ordinance amending chapter 4.12 of the Longmont municipal code on purchasing. Are there any questions from Council on this ordinance? Seeing none, I’d like to open the public comment period on this ordinance. Is there anyone in the chamber that would like to comment? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. So can I have a motion?
Unknown Speaker 1:22:41
I move ordinance 20 2303. Second,
Unknown Speaker 1:22:44
so it’s been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez seconded by Councillor McCoy. Let’s vote. All those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? So 20 2303 passes unanimously. Let’s see where else we have. So we have dry creek business park rezoning concept plan amendment and comprehensive plan amendment. We have three ordinances under this under item C is ordinance 20 2304. Would we like to pass these individually or as a so we’re going to pass them individually? So 20 2304 is a bill for an ordinance conditionally approving the Dry Creek business park rezoning from m mu dash are mixed use regional center to m mu dash e mixed use employment, generally located at the northeast corner of dry creek drive and likens Gohlke Gulch road. Are there any comments on this ordinance from Council? I’d like to open it to the public for comment. Seeing no one from the public eye closed the public hearing on these ordinances. Can I have a motion? Well, that’s what I asked.
Unknown Speaker 1:24:11
So that’s been Moved by Councillor waters seconded by Councillor Hidalgo fairing Let’s vote all those in favor. say aye. Aye. All those opposed? So 2023 Dash oh four passes unanimously. 2023 Dash oh five is a bill for an ordinance conditionally approving the Dry Creek business park concept plan amendment, generally located at the northeast corner of dry creek drive and light likens Gulch drug road. Are there any questions from Council on this ordinance? Seeing none, I will open the public hearing on this ordinance. Seeing no one from the public wishing to speak on it I would like a motion so that’s been met this ordinance has been Moved by Councillor Hidalgo fairy seconded by Councillor Martin, all those in favor say aye aye. All those opposed? Seeing none that passes unanimously. Bill 2023 Dash oh six is a bill for an ordinance approving the land use amendment to the Envision Longmont comprehensive plan for dry creek business park, generally located at the northeast corner of dry creek and likens Gulch. Are there any questions from Council on this ordinance? Seeing none, I would like to open the public hearing on this ordinance. Is there anybody from the public that would like to speak on it? Seeing none, can I have a motion?
Unknown Speaker 1:25:43
Okay, so the 20 2306 has been Moved by Councillor waters seconded by Councillor Hidalgo. fairing. Let’s have a motion, please. Do we did Let’s vote? Aye. Hi. All those opposed. So there were no items removed from the consent agenda. Let’s take a five minute break.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:00
You. We are in general business. And we’re having a discussion about allocating Council Board Liaison appointments to the newly elected at large councilmember Sean McCoy. So Don, are you going to do this? Or do you want me to? Or? I would rather you do.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:49
I didn’t really have anything prepared to help walk you through. We thought it would be a council discussion, there are the five. The list that I believe you Mayor Peck sent me the five that Councilmember McCoy maybe somebody’s willing to give up to council, they’re listed in the council COMM The consortium of cities neighborhood group leaders aren’t in public places museum Advisory Board and the resource conservation advisory board. There are a couple of those the neighborhood group leaders in art and public places, those conflict in terms of time, so that might not work out. I didn’t know if you wanted to discuss or what you how you’d like to walk through.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:34
So thank you, I’m trying to pull it up. My some reason my computer doesn’t like me very well tonight. So to the public, every time someone comes on the council, they get to, they get to be a liaison to our advisory boards. They get to be on the advisory board to our different committees. Counselor, McCoy is new so what I did was ask some of the the ones that had the most liaison appointments if they would like to share some of those so that counselor McCoy could also have some opportunities to serve on those boards. Counselor McCoy, did you look at this list?
Unknown Speaker 1:37:35
Well, oh, thank you, Mayor Peck. Yes, I did. And I would do any and all of them. I know there’s some overlap there on some. And sometimes that means that you have to go to one early and leave and go to the other or you have to think about going to one one month and one the next month. However it works out best. And I can do that as well. If people are against that or like being on on something that would have an overlap, then I’m willing to take the option.
Unknown Speaker 1:38:11
There are five, there are five vacancies here. No, they’re not vacant, but they will be are ready to let you have. That’s quite a few for somebody who’s working full time. So okay,
Unknown Speaker 1:38:29
so and I do notice that a lot of them are mine. The only two that I’ve noticed that new meetings at work have come up. Where’s our cab? The Resource Conservation advisory board? It sounds like no, it was the consortium of cities consortium of cities. I’m just the alternate.
Unknown Speaker 1:38:52
That was by Councillor Martin. Okay, she would relinquish that.
Unknown Speaker 1:38:56
Okay. Okay. So I just wasn’t sure if that was for the alternate position or the actual positions. Okay, so yeah, that’s not me. Yeah, that’s not me. And then our cab was the was the other one ngvla that there’s been occasions where I’ve had work commitments on that evening. It’s not happening very often. I just, you know, I put that out there as a choice. The museum, there’s no, there’s no problem with that for me, so I can still keep with that. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:30
So that leaves the consortium of cities. Would you like that one? Builder Consortium? Yes, I would. Okay. neighborhood group leaders Association.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:41
I would be fine. Doing that one too. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:45
Look at the time there. Most of
Unknown Speaker 1:39:47
these are after, would allow me to, to get home from school. You know, Boulder Valley’s high schools have all gone to 355 in times So that’s why then coming back from there, as you know, anytime between 30 and 40 minutes,
Unknown Speaker 1:40:06
okay. Art in Public Places.
Unknown Speaker 1:40:09
I served on that in the past. It has a conflict on the third. So I It depends on if if somebody else who else has that was? Oh Yarbro
Unknown Speaker 1:40:28
Oh, there she is.
Unknown Speaker 1:40:30
What’s your thoughts, Councilmember? Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 1:40:33
I think up if it conflicts with with your time
Unknown Speaker 1:40:41
she could keep it if it conflicts with the what the other ones that you’re choosing.
Unknown Speaker 1:40:47
Oh, which, which I would definitely want to do the consortium. I really did like the art in public places. Yeah, I would, I would love to stay on the art in public places. It’s kind of right up my alley. Okay. And in that because I had years before I got in council, Peter Schmidt and I work to bring the A Art Center to Longmont. And then, since that, the the resource conservation advisory board that’s in Boulder, it’s on my way.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:22
Okay. So you’re gonna take that one our cab? So public places? Yes. And the consortium of cities? Yep. Perfect.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:32
Thank you for this opportunity.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:34
You’re very welcome. Thank you councillors for relinquishing notes so that he can join us in those the liaison opportunities. So we are at final call public invited to be heard. Is there anybody in the public that would like to speak at this time? Seeing no one I close, final call public invited to be heard. We’re at Marin Council comments. Do we have any comments from councillors? Councillor waters?
Tim Waters 1:42:04
We received an email trying to remember from whom the city is what his from Erica today about the city being recognized as one of the top 1% in the country. Talking 10% Well, that’s pretty doggone good. Somebody texted? I don’t Is there going to be something that we’re going
Unknown Speaker 1:42:26
to? Well, we’re going to talk to him about making a presentation remotely. At the next meeting.
Tim Waters 1:42:31
Great. Matt Bennett’s gone. So the timescales. I just think that’s pretty impressive. Right to get that kind of accolade for the good work that’s going on. So not to go unrecognized in sobriety way.
Unknown Speaker 1:42:44
Yeah, the awards up in the city manager’s office and administrative office, if you want to go check it out. It’s 11 pounds.
Tim Waters 1:42:54
Well, for judging by weight, that might be the most substantial award ever.
Unknown Speaker 1:42:56
Yeah. I’d be happy to lay out a little more detail.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:03
Because I don’t, I don’t have the letter in front of me. So go ahead.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:06
So this so you may remember our customer satisfaction surveys conducted by etc. And what they found was that we are in the top 10% of all cities with respect to satisfaction with overall quality of services satisfaction with customer service provided by employees and satisfaction with the value residents think they receive for local taxes and fees. So we’re within the top 10% of all the communities they survey.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:31
Why that just fits right into our executive session. We just held on core services regardless of what we think we got a you got an award. Oh, I know. That was just a year right. I counselor, Hidalgo ferry.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:52
Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to update the council and public anyone who’s out there and share the opportunity that Mayor Peck and I had with staff with Harold and Sandy and who else so in just from staff, from la ha. We went to go visit the arroyo village project in Denver. It is a homeless shelter. I mean it houses a myriad of services. Try it has a trauma informed design. It was it was a phenomenal opportunity to see what could be and what kind of services we could really we can mirror in our community as well. That place included every homeless shelter to workforce housing, a portion of it so it had 60 Bed homeless shelter, a 335 one bedroom apartment units of supportive housing and 90 512 and three bedroom workforce permanently affordable housing in this In this building and it was phenomenal. So you know, I would really like to continue working in finding out ways that we can incorporate incorporate something similar with those wraparound services in our community. And thank you for the opportunity, whoever organize that piece. I really appreciate it.
Unknown Speaker 1:45:20
That was Molly. So I would like to announce that there’s going to be a peak service open house. This is for our peak service on RTD as well as on Amtrak. It’s going to be Tuesday, January 31, from five to 7pm pm at the Hampton Inn in Boulder. Yes. Thank you. Councillor McCoy.
Unknown Speaker 1:45:48
Thank you, Mayor. I just would like to wish good luck to all our kids in St. Vrain, Boulder Valley, Westminster and Jeffco school districts that will be competing this weekend at the at Longmont High School at the Future Business Leaders Conference. At Longmont on the 28th So good luck.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:13
Good luck. So that is the end of council comments. I don’t see any more city manager or ODM remarks, no comments, Mayor, council, city attorney Eugene, no comments, Mayor. Thank you. Can I have a motion to adjourn? So it’s been moved and seconded that we adjourn. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. We are adjourned.
Transcribed by https://otter.ai