Longmont City Council Regular Session 9-08-2020
9:31AM Sep 9, 2020
short term rentals
Yes, Mayor Bagley, Mayor Bagley obviously you are in attendance.
your council member Duggal fairing.
Here. Councilmember Martin. Here. Councilmember Peck. Here. Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez here. Councilmember waters
here. Mary have a quorum.
All right. I'm Marcia, would you like to lead us in the Pledge this evening?
No, but I will.
I hate doing it which is why calling different people
It's my turn. I'll do it next. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States.
For whichever one
with liberty JOHN,
and I'm going to call Harold, Tim. Don. I think john wasn't on mute for the record and Susie, I think she was on mute Susie. Yeah, I'm gonna call them all out of order for being on mute and making me Marcia and Joan say the pledge
Y'all suck. All right last week. What you're gonna do next week now to Harold. I'll do it again. I'll do it to everybody who was on mute this week from now. That's the order right there next time. No, just kidding. All right, anyone wishing to provide public comment, just a quick reminder, you have to be watching the live stream. Then once the call and information is displayed, you'll enter the meeting ID and then you'll be asked for your participant ID and then press crowned. When you hear confirmation, the end of the meeting. You'll hear how many people are in the meeting. And then you're going to wait and you'll be called an order of when you got in. And the number that you could be associated with is the last three digits of your phone. Like always, your comments are limited to three minutes and into three minutes. Unfortunately, I'm gonna have to cut you off no matter how awesome. Your comments are. So that's where we're at. Can we have an emote? Can we have a motion to approve the minutes of August 25 2020.
Councilmember Peck? Mo
All right. It's been moved and seconded.
assuming there's no further debate, all in favor say aye.
All opposed say nay. All right.
The motion passes unanimously. Any agenda revisions submission of documents or motions direct the city manager to add agenda items to future agendas.
Councillor pack? Thank you, Mayor badly Actually, it's a question and if it's, there may not be emotion. So at a previous meeting Herald we directed staff to put on a future agenda, the amended air quality contract, and I'm wondering if that has been assigned to an agenda yet. date?
I'm not working on that. Eugene delaune tonight.
Harold Eugene. I know we're working on the amendment and we're looking at either the second meeting and September or first meeting in October, I think.
Okay, thank you very much. I just wanted to check on that. I don't need a motion.
All right. Great. And then here the question I have, we're still ready on September 15. With Lh a presentation, correct?
Correct. They're gonna we're gonna put that under special reports and presentations.
Perfect. All right. Then seeing nobody else's hand. Let's move on to your COVID-19 update. Do you have anything?
Yes, Mayor Council, I do. Sure.
you all see my screen with the graph on it?
Yes, yes. Okay. So this is a Boulder County site and actually wanted to go over this. As you can see, this is the number of Boulder County residents nearly reporting is tested positive as of September 8. And part of the reason why I wanted to show you this is that we have two fairly significant Well, not fairly significant spikes related to the number of cases in Boulder County, just under 70. And it looks like it was on the fifth and then almost 50 on this date. I did have the chance to talk to Jeff Zak today about those numbers. And, you know, was that something that they were seeing in the communities or was it rate related to the university system, and based on what he told me that I could say today, there's going to be more information coming out but I'm roughly approximately 70% of the cases that we're seeing coming in at this level are associated with cu, in the majority of cases are seen are also coming in in the lower are also associated with the university system. And so for me that was important to understand is this something that we're just seeing in all the communities isn't an isolated community. And so I want you all, I wanted you all to know that these spikes, that's what he indicated. It's related to as we move down through the charts and looking at the data, you may remember that when we looked at the five day average on PCR testing, I believe the last time I went over this, we were at about 1.7. It's now move back up to 2.5. Obviously, based on those spikes, and then this is where you can see the rolling five day average on that PCR testing. You know, still at 2.5 it's a relatively good number, but obviously not as good as where we were trending a week or so ago. This chart again shows you the number of tests that they were performing. So again, you see the ability to hit at 500. And so when you look at transmission source, you can see that of those recent cases. And this is 830 to nine five, immunity and limited person to person which is obviously connected to the gatherings that we all have seen on the media. This is a an interesting chart, I mean, so again, what you're seeing is that growth in the 20 to 29 year old category continues to distance itself from from the other age categories, but you're seeing 10 to 19. Pick up a little bit, but the rest are tending to stay pretty consistent in the overall flow of what we've seen, at least within the last month of COVID-19. Again, this is the five day average trend, you see that spike once again, and then you see it dip down. And here's where you actually see where this is occurring. So If you remember we had recently been fairly close to Boulder in terms of the number of cases and then they were just under 100 ahead of us. Now they're almost 200 cases ahead of us, which really is just ratifying that information that Jeff, that I had the opportunity to talk to Jeff about today. So, boulders at 1009, were at 805. So if you look at where we were, I mean, again, once again, and you look at where the other communities where it's really showing that the growth is really occurring. It's associated with the university system, and then you're also starting to see it here. Remember, we at one point a couple weeks ago, we're at 36.7. It's starting to draw to again, you're seeing that connected to Boulder. The good news that we're starting to see is if you look at this, all of them tend to be in green. ICU beds is still in yellow. In remember the available med surge beds and again, this is related to elective procedures and that have been going on and things beyond COVID. And we had been a little further in the red, we're right on the line. Earlier today before the change in numbers, it was actually in the in the yellow. And so the hospital system is still doing relatively well are still doing well based on the information that we have. So, in the conversation, you all can probably expect an update from Jeff coming either late tonight or tomorrow morning. It's probably going to echo many of the things that I've talked to you about but they are watching the university system, pretty close. One of the things that they're doing is I saw Robert on here for another item, you know, they're doing some of the bioburden testing and determining what residence halls and they can test and so that's also
you know, adding to the the number of cases that we're seeing, we are seeing enforcement in Boulder. In terms of the activities, you all may have seen that recently on the news. So they are watching the numbers. The question that I have to get with him about or get with the county health staff is really what does that mean in terms of where we stand in terms of moving to protect our neighbor? And how do we move in that direction, since they are pretty sure that it is related to that campus setting? And so I have more questions. We just didn't have a lot of time to talk. And as we get that information, we'll be providing that account to the council. But I did want you to see these numbers, because it is something new based on what we've been seen. I will tell you from my conversations, I think that the Jeff and the county health department do understand it and they're working with our colleagues in Boulder and then also the university system. Be happy to answer any questions at this point.
See two questions.
Sorry, duck water.
Thanks, Mayor Bagley. Harold, as we look at the data in the spikes that are associated with the university, a couple of meetings ago, we looked at the criteria or standards for whatever the next is the next phase care for your neighbor. What's the
neighbor? Protect your neighbor?
Yeah, um, there were I think we're set. Are there seven criteria that have to be met?
I think eight or nine,
though, is it fair to assume those spikes that we see that we attribute to the university because it's in Boulder County, would would be a factor in keeping or prohibiting the count of that county from from qualifying among or meeting the seven standards or ever applying for the protect your neighbor options or or protocols
That's actually I don't know, the and that's one of the conversations that I want to have have with the county health department is to understand that because what's different about this is because of the so the wastewater testing is a bit of a Nexus in terms of then they're testing, I guess, dormitories and other areas. So the difference in this is it's not like they're just seeing widespread in the community. And so they are understanding where it's coming from. So what I don't know is, is that difference does it make? Does it change how we look at protect our neighbor, but that's actually after this afternoon moved to the top of my list is a follow up conversation with them, so I can understand it soon. As we know, we'll let you know.
Yeah, thanks. Obviously, to the degree that people you know, would like to see us get to that face. I mean, the burden obviously falls to the university, to do what's necessary till so that the whole county right could qualify and apply for that. That status.
And in to add on to that the state and the county are they're all working on dashboards so we can understand where we are. And that's part of the question is to understand the impact because if you remember some of the criteria, which it's continuing to change is X number of days with a decreasing caseload. And so we had really been on that trajectory and What I don't know is does it start as over again? Or is this where we, you know, we have x days and then after this, we're building on to that so that's some of the specific questions that I need to get answered.
They'll be awfully good to get that information. Thanks.
JOHN. We're sorry hills Rebecca.
It's okay. So um, as we watch this nationwide and look at the spike, a lot of them nationally are coming from universities in the opening of colleges. I've also heard of the discussion That sending these these students home is also going to add to a problem that they are carrying this back. So my question is, has the university or the county thought about doing a quarantine dorm so that we don't put the infected people back into a community? It would seem like this might come under the protect our neighbor mandate as well. But I'm just curious if you've heard whether we're going to have they're having a quarantine dorm, are they sending these kids back home?
So I don't know what they're doing per se. Tomorrow I have every Wednesday I have a conversation with the other managers within Boulder County and Jane's on that conversation. So that was going to be one of my questions, because I know they're more in contact with the city of Boulder. I do know that when they identify someone that they then have to quarantine them. But I don't know what they're doing it you know, multiple schools are doing different things exact are canceling. Some are quarantining. So it's different at all in various University settings. But again, I'll know more. It was just one of those with the holiday yesterday or conversations occurred today. Normally we'd want to and, and one of my amazing teammates just said, See you does have dorms set up for quarantine I and isolation. So Bri could just so you all know maraca is the one that just sent me this mic is on the just team. And so she's interacting with with them on a much regular regular basis. And she doesn't know the number of the number of rooms but they do have that set up. So I'm assuming somebody test positive, they're getting moved. The question is, what capacity do they have? And I think we're all hearing that in In terms of enforcement, they're getting pretty aggressive in Boulder. You all may have seen the article where I believe it was $11,000 in fines to fraternities and sororities or that was in the newspaper. So I know they're taking it serious and I'll have more information from Jane tomorrow.
I would like to point out that cu also has its own hospital where I spent my winter break one year. So they are well equipped to take care of it. I hope they do a good job.
Alright, Harold, anything else?
Nope. Just wanted to let council know we are watching this. We are staying on top of it. And we'll provide you with more information as that becomes available.
All right. Well, we have no special reports or presentations correct?
All right. Let's go ahead and move on the first call public invited to be heard. Let's go ahead and take a two minute break while people think Get in the queue and then we'll be back
For those of you who are calling in tonight, we've just let you in the meeting. We are still on hold. We will get to you one at a time. Please focus on your audio in your phone that you used
to call in.
Do not follow the live stream. please mute that it will get confusing. We will call on you by the last three digits of your phone number one at a time. Please be ready to unmute yourself at the time we call you out. Thank you.
Again, welcome to all of those that have just joined us using your telephone. please mute the live stream. When we begin calling you we will call you out by the last three digits of your phone number one at a time. If we do not see that you're unmuting yourself in a timely manner, we will come back to you and take the notes of the next caller. Please be patient with us. Again, please mute your live stream so that you are hearing us Through your phone.
Mayor. I'm going to give it about 30 seconds so that the slide will leave the live stream and then we can begin with our public invited to be heard.
1234567 Cool, let's go ahead and throw up the first public invited to be heard speaker.
All right caller whose phone number ends in 687. I'm going to ask you,
you have to wait 30 seconds right?
No matter. The slide has already left the screen. We should be ready to go.
What I mean, isn't there a 32nd delay if they're watching?
Right, they should be listening to their audio in their phone. So I think we're good to go.
Let's give it a shot and then how many are in the cube
Steph, did you count?
We have 10 in the queue.
Perfect. Let's go for it.
Right color ending in 687 It looks like you've unmuted yourself. Please state your name your address for the record. You have three minutes.
All right, thank you. So my name is john ketone. And I live to live at 948 11th Avenue in Longmont. And thanks for your time tonight. I'm calling to ask council to reconsider the recent motion vote on short term rentals. Specifically the one that eliminates the ability for Longmont residents to rent out one investment property. So a little bit about myself. I'm one of those owners who rents out an investment property as an Airbnb. I opened my small business around this in October using our first investment home and I use that business to spend more time at home with my kids now And to still have enough income to continue living in our neighborhood. We live in the same neighborhood that the Airbnb exists. And so asking you to reconsider the vote, I have a few points I'd like you to consider in support of keeping the code the way it is today. So my my first point, that motion vote, I think would harm or eliminates about a dozen locally owned small businesses just like mine, that are licensed businesses, based on the list we were able to receive from code enforcement. Each of us has invested some 10s and sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars into starting these businesses. And we've done this based on the fact that in 2017, counsel explicitly allowed these types of businesses. So that's my first point. I think. They really pulled the rug out from under us, since we've invested time and money. Thinking that these businesses would be legal. And now we're facing the prospect of maybe not recouping our investments. The second point I'd like to consider, this motion makes Longmont less affordable for us as middle class small business owners. And not only that, but it has a negative halo effect on local economic activity. So our business would no longer be hiring services like local cleaners and yard maintenance. And the travelers who come and patronize our business. Those travelers that prefer this type of lodging would no longer be spending their money in our neighborhood restaurants and shops. The third point I'd like council to consider, there's kind of a legal question about this type of code change that's come up within a group of us. So this type of code change kind of takes away our property. rights as well, which were established when the original code was released in 2017. So now that we've invested in our businesses invested in our second properties and established and settled new property rights, is council able to take those away with the courts support that. I know of a court case in Austin, Texas, where their city council made the exact same change, and their state courts struck down that change. considering those established property,
sir, I love what you're saying. Yeah, but it's over three minutes. I'm gonna have to cut you off.
Sorry. Okay. Well, thank you for your time, guys. Thank you. Next
caller whose phone number ends in 191. I'm going to ask you to mute yourself. Please state your name and your address for the record, please and you have three minutes
Hello, can you hear me?
Well, good evening mayor and council members. In 2018. I came before the council twice to plead my case regarding owning a second home and being able to rent on a short term basis. My name is Ted reitsma and I reside at 155 sunset. And then back then the council decided it was okay for us to continue our business as long as we reside in Longmont and only on one income property, get a permit and pay lodging and sales tax. As soon as your ruling became law, we immediately went to the city. We paid and were issued the third str permit and then applied and were granted a sales tax license. Since then, we have paid the city over 30 $500 in sales and lodging taxes, not including the exorbitant property taxes we have paid since acquiring this home. And it has come to my attention that you would like to revisit this ruling and Apos will make amends to it potentially eliminating the opportunity, the second home by a resident for short term rental income. As I previously stated to the council back then we happen to inherit this home with a substantial mortgage from my wife's mother. With a pandemic upon us. We've had numerous cancellations this year in the amount of over $22,000. Unfortunately, we have had to take out a loan to cover the mortgage and utilities, and it's still not enough to cover our losses. Now seems you'd like to take away any chance of recovery we're still holding on to because for a few members of the community, and a few members of the council running a second home short term should now be illegal. Upon reviewing all the issued str permits, there are only a handful of permitted owners that actually reside in Longmont and will use their second home for income. Now, I understand In the thinking of some people that short term rentals or just party houses, do nothing good for the neighborhood or community, and they should be banned altogether. But that is not the case for the majority of the public and short term rental owners. We have never had a single problem with our neighbors or the city, and our neighbors look out for home when it is vacant. They welcome all of our guests with open arms and our guests return the favor. The reviews by our guests is nothing but praise for our community. there's been plenty of times after our guests check out that we have seen empty shoe boxes from Browns or pizza boxes from Rosalie's and other businesses. I do believe it is the right thing to make sure everyone is up to code and compliant with all the local rules and regulations. But if you do decide to reverse your ruling from 2018, please consider as homeowners that actually abide by the rules and have done nothing wrong to continue doing business with the city and guests and maybe even bring up the possibility of grants bothering us original applicants into the new ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Thank you, sir. next
caller whose phone number ends in 452. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself. So please state your name and address for the record and you have three minutes.
Color ending in four or five two, can you please try to unmute yourself.
Good evening Mayor badland city council members Sherry Malloy 2113 rangeview Lane. I'm calling in to speak to item nine. See updating the element code to include protections of riparian area, areas habitat and species. Two years ago Council approved the first set of major updates to longlines LDC and 17 years. At that time council directed staff to include several write period protection amendments and to develop a sustainability evaluation tool. As a result, this section of the updates was delayed. The Wildlife Management Plan was completed last fall and hasn't formed the LDC. This ordinance is ready to go and will help protect riparian areas wetlands streams, creeks, openspace as a wildlife, it depends on all these. The 2021 budget is also on your agenda. When COVID hit the posting for a full time environmental planner got pulled yet for the last six months and beyond. Development continues at a rapid pace. Hiring an environmental planner must be a top priority or this ordinance is not going to be effective. Similar Literally, similarly with COVID limiting activities, people are accessing all aspects of nature, often accessing it to death. You know, the tremendous increase in use, overuse and often abuse to all our natural places by variety of people and for a variety of reasons. The harmful impacts are not only very expensive to repair, but in many cases will take years and even decades to recover, desperately needed our resources for education, advocacy and enforcement to protect these places now. Although counsel and heroes have recognized the need, there is no FDA in the budget for a volunteer coordinator. The NDF Danielle's position is split between project manager and volunteer coordinator. That's impossible is both positions have become more than full time in the last six months with no end in sight. The return on the financial investment of a full time volunteer coordinator is exponential with the cost to repair and restore damaged areas. dwarfing a salary costs Volunteers are essential for healthy communities. People from all walks of life, donate their time and effort to make commitments, share expertise, learn, take responsibility and feel pride for their contribution to the greater good. needed now is monitoring, gathering data, doing restoration and especially Park Rangers. Everyone wants a healthy community, a peaceful place where people and wildlife live in harmony. We all have ideas about how to make that happen. The big question is who will make that happen? volunteers can all of you who have expressed your intention to respect and protect our natural public amenities which is fabulous. Tonight, you can do so by codifying safeguards in the LDC and to enforce this ordinance effectively, an environmental planner needs to be in the budget and to protect their natural areas. Appoint five volunteers coordinator position also. Thank you.
Thanks again, Shari. Just To the side, I You are always on three minutes
color whose number ends in 499. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself. Please state your name and your address for the record and you have three minutes.
Can you hear me?
Can you hear me? Yeah. Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. This is Joe Kelly from barberry drive in Longmont. Okay. Hello, Mr. Mayor in Longmont City Council. Several of us spoke to you in person at the council meeting in February on the dangers of microwave radiation, the same radiation that smart meters emanate 24 seven. At that time to my recall, we brought each of you a copy of a white paper from 2012 authored by Dr. Timothy shakily in collaboration with the National Institute for science, law and public policy called getting smarter about the smart grid. And for reference sake, for anyone listening who would like to read Tim's paper, you can find it online with a quick search of the title getting smarter about the smart grid. As you are aware, Tim shekel he is an international expert in wired and wireless communication to is engineered the development of electric utility gateways and energy management management systems. For over 30 years, he is well known and regarded in his field. He is an expert expert who lives in our own backyard. Tim has repeatedly told me that the AMI will be obsolete in three to five years. This long month really want to invest its $7.5 million allocated for ami and soon to be obsolete technology according to Tim, or do we want to look further into the future to solutions that will give us more than we already imagined. To quote Buckminster Fuller You never change things by fighting existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete. Interestingly, that is exactly what Tim has done with his Emma, an acronym for energy management and metering architecture, which is soon to be featured in an article in solar today. And if you don't already have a copy of Tim's latest revision of the MR paper, you soon will. Now why would we want to listen to Tim shakily? Duncan Campbell Esquire of Boulder, wrote this about Tim in the foreword to the above mentioned white paper. Dr. Timothy Shockley has been a friend and colleague for nearly 25 years, I served as corporate legal counsel when he founded a company whose primary focus was on designing home automation systems, and specifically on developing communication gateways and energy management systems employing demand response. He was also involved in the early development of standards for and testing of smart meters, including advanced metering infrastructure or ami. He became a pioneer of such energy management systems and gateways with his early cutting edge Smart Home product. His extensive knowledge and wisdom and systems thinking in this area has been garnered in large part from his deep involvement in smart grid technology, and then taking a leading role in the development and writing a formal national and international standards for close to 30 years. As such, he is uniquely qualified to have formulated this exceptional and game changing critical analysis, getting smarter about the smart grid
we're doing for now, man, we're gonna have to cut you off. That's over three minutes, but we appreciate your comments.
One question, how many of you have read the paper and if you haven't, I would urge you to thank you.
Thank you, man.
That's for Martin.
I've read the paper. Thank you.
All right, next caller
caller whose number ends in 777. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself. Please state your name and address for the record and you have three
Can you hear me?
We can hear you.
Yes, thank you very much. Thank you Mayor Bagley and council members. My name is Aiden Melendez. I made 1543 South Kaufman call I'm calling in to voice our concerns on the amount of traffic and unsafe speed of traffic coming to our neighborhood on South Kaufman Street. We moved into southcombe coffin in 1981. After looking at other neighborhoods, our family chose South Moore Park because of how the neighborhood felt it was very welcoming, quiet and calm. The street was very clean well kept and as I mentioned, it was very welcoming. We noticed the street was wide and it was common to see the neighbors out close to the street having conversations with each other. There was a lot of traffic and it felt very safe talking to each other across the street. Drivers usually waved at each other because we all knew the neighbors and their vehicles. We have gotten accustomed, accustomed to the slight increase in traffic when prospect was developed, but now it has become like a Speedway through our neighborhood neighborhood. Because it is wide and it is downhill. With the light and the collector street designation. It has become unsafe and I have actually experienced where we have motion motion with our hands to to slow drivers down. Because of the kids in the neighborhood, and drivers have actually sped up. We as residents itself more power are asking that there is some consideration and how our neighborhood and our lives are now being impacted. Thank you very much.
Thank you, sir.
He's number and in 949, I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself. Please state your name and address for the record. And you will have three minutes.
We can hear you Hello.
Oh, Hi, this is Ruby Bowman. 1512 left hand drive Longmont, Mayor Bagley and council members. I hope you got a chance to read my comments I sent you about the updated riparian codes and the 2021 budget. Please implement my recommendations and address specific issues. I brought up my comments. I would also like to really reiterate the importance of filling the environmental sustainability plan or position And please hire the environmental planner as soon as possible and approved the position for 2021. And finally, Longmont needs more Park Rangers. Let's not go through another year where we have to where we don't have enough Rangers to protect the city's natural resources and to handle the large influx of people into our parks greenways and open space. Thank you so much by
bass Ruby, next door.
Caller whose number ends in three to three, I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself. Please state your name and address for the record and your three minutes.
Thank you, Jamie CMOS 525 East 16th Avenue.
Thank you Mayor Bagley and council members for allowing me to speak tonight. I'm here to ask you to enact the changes to chapter 15.0 5.0 22 Arrow 15.0 5.030 and 15.1 0.020 of the municipal code that city staff have worked on for the last year. These changes will better protect our creeks, streams, wetlands, riparian areas and those species utilizing this habitat. I also strongly urge you to push the city just below the environmental planner position that was advertised, but that was pulled through the pandemic. Development and construction has progressed despite COVID-19 and the city needs someone whose main job is to review development applications with an eye toward how those developments will impact our natural areas. I also strongly urge you to encourage the hiring of additional park rangers to enforce city policies protecting our natural areas. As we've seen since the pandemic hit, residents have flocked to long months open spaces in the absence of other recreational opportunities. And they haven't always treated our natural areas with the respect and care they deserve. Stronger protections can only go so far if there aren't enough people to enforce those protections. Thank you for your time.
Thank you very much. next caller
caller whose number ends in 618. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself and please state your name and address for the record and you have three minutes.
Hello, can you hear me? We can hear you.
Dear Longmont City Council. My name is Noah madfinger and I reside at 2200 Spencer Street. As I'm starting the application process for my short term rental, I was appalled to learn that this council is considering taking away the rights of property owners by limiting and preventing short term rentals. This so called policy consideration seems like such a knee jerk poorly thought out whimsical reaction, that I can't believe it's even being given the time of day. But here we are. So since we're there to discuss this, I insist that you consider these points to better understand the shortcomings of this policy. See change. Number one. First, just Who are these short term rentals. These are our friends and family. For many for many of these visitors is their first time the long long into the Front Range. They spend money at local restaurants. They have fun and local bars and breweries, and they go to the Rocky Mountain National Park and make memories which they will cherish for life. In short, these are the people and tourists our city needs, especially during this time of economic hardship. Number two, if Longmont can address this needed service, they will go elsewhere. Are we so naive to think that these visitors will still spend their money at our businesses that we cannot provide them with short term stays? No, if Loveland or lions or Estes Park or short term rentals, they will spend their money there. I would, you would, let's not kid ourselves. Short term rentals provide a home like atmosphere. Short term rentals will not take into local Hotels, we will simply lose the economic opportunity. closing the door to short term rentals is closing the doors to long long businesses and two long months prosperity. Three. The majority of short term renters are families. People love them and people love it when their families can stay close. To me it seems that the council believes short term renters are composed of undesirables and problematic people yet Need I remind the council that many of our city's workers are short term renters themselves. And I sincerely hope that this bias does not extend to these fine people. Number four, it is only a small percentage of homes that even provide short term rentals. They're just nine I believe, but now you're considering eliminating this. It's not even a problem. In fact, you ought to be supporting this as it brings money to our community. Last of all, and most of all, this policy is an insult to our hopes and dreams. We invested in private property To make our lives better, and in pursuit of happiness, and we chose Longmont as our home, I implore you oppose this restriction on short term rentals and do not allow it to move forward any further. Thank you for your time.
Thank you, sir. All right, next caller. We have what to left.
We have one caller left mayor. All right. Let's
hear what he or she has to say.
Caller who's number and in 556. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself. Please state your name and address for the record and you have three minutes.
Hello, can you hear me?
We can hear you. Okay.
Thank you. My name is Claudia Smith. And I currently live in Prescott, Arizona. There was I'm calling if I just wanna put away my experience talk about my experience as a Airbnb customer. Let's use something like seven to 10 to the 12th we were having a hard time to find our Airbnb to spend the time in Colorado so we found a beautiful place in Longmont beautiful house. And that gave us the opportunity for my family and I to get to know the area we fall in love with Longmont. We were able to feel like we were local people. We were walking in the streets enjoying the parks. We went to the restaurants, we enjoy them chopping around area, and in general we enjoy the culture around Longmont. So I'm What I'm trying to say with these is we love it so much that we even try to live in their area of fortunately the things my husband job situation and the school for my kids. We were not able to move to Longmont but we I mean if if I ever come back to Colorado, Lohmann definitely is the place that I will go first after living five years in Erie I live in Erie I live in Taunton and nothing compares with the feeling that you get by living in Longmont. So all this all these My opinion is based because I live for a few days like almost a week in one of the Airbnb homes in Longmont. And
like I said, we
because this pool of my kids, we had to To shorten, but that didn't stop us to still be sitting in Longmont enjoying the wreck local restaurants, enjoying the bars enjoying all what LogMeIn is providing. So I gotta say that you guys have a great community. And this is the main reason of Michael. So just to let you know, the important, important, how important is for us as a families, that you guys provide this kind of service, there is no way that living in a hotel will enjoy as much as we did in an Airbnb. So that's all I have to say. And thank you for for listening.
Thank you, man.
All right. That Is it right for the cube.
Yep, that's correct. That's it.
All right. Good luck. Move on to the consent agenda. Would you go ahead and read that for us Miss King data?
Of course mayor, item nine is ordinance 2020 dash 35. an ordinance authorizing the issuance of the city of Longmont, Colorado, open space sales and use tax revenue refunding and improvement bonds, series 2020. public hearing and second reading scheduled for September 22 2029. b is ordinance 2020 dash 36. A bill for an ordinance making additional appropriations for expenses and liabilities of the city of Longmont for the fiscal year beginning January 120 20. public hearing and second reading scheduled for September 22 2029 C is ordinance 2020 dash 37. A bill for an ordinance repealing and reenacting chapter 15.0 5.02 of the Longmont municipal code on the protection of streams and creeks, wetlands, riparian areas, and 15.0 5.030 on habitat and species protection and amending chapters 15.0 8.070 on non non conforming structure And 15.10 point O two o on all other terms defined. public hearing and second reading scheduled for September 22 2029 D is resolution 2020 dash 88 a resolution of the Longmont city council adopting a revised investment policy for the city. Nine years resolution 20 2089. a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont and the United States Bureau of Reclamation for a water smart grant. Nine F is resolution 2020 dash 90 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont in northern Colorado water Conservancy district for water quality monitoring regarding compounds of emerging concern. Resolution nine G is resolution 2020 dash 91 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont and the Federal Aviation Administration for a grant to improve the runway safety area at the Vance brand Municipal Airport and nine H is resolution 2020 dash 92 Resolution of Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city in the state of Colorado for grant funding for the rewind program.
All right, thank you very much just for Christiansen.
I would like to pull nine C for discussion. And nine h just for a comment.
All right. Can we have a motion? Well, I'm gonna actually move the consent agenda less cnh.
All right. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor say aye.
All opposed say nay.
All right, Paul, was that night view?
Was that night for you?
Yes. All right.
The motion cast passes unanimously. All right. Let's move on to ordinances on second reading. We're gonna go ahead and take two minute break and we will ask folks to call in if you are calling for free Section 10 ordinances and second reading and public hearings, you'll need to call in now and get in the queue. And then once we have the queue lined up, we're going to go ahead and zip through these I hope. So. Let's go ahead and
see in two minutes.
Okay, are your
caregivers 30 seconds now to let the slide leave the live stream and then we'll begin. We have two callers. One of them we admitted they were still hanging out in the waiting area from the last public invited to be heard section so I don't know if they have anything they want to say regarding this public hearing.
But we will ask them,
Steph, are you prepared?
Mayor we can begin when you're ready.
All right, let's go ahead with item 10. A ordinance 2020 dash 34 a bill for an ordinance amending section 4.1 6.010 bulama in Caught on wildblue investments. Are there any questions from council? Right, I'm not seeing any let's go ahead and open the public hearing on August 20 2030 foot sorry counselor Christiansen.
Um, yeah, I
am a little uncomfortable with
the fact that we're taking we are adding as good investments, municipal bonds and mortgage backed securities, which were two of the things that, you know, which under good circumstances would be fine. However, you know, they have proven to be very both of them have proved to be very problematic in times of financial meltdowns. And so, I'm just wondering if we could get a little bit of reassurance from Jim golden that he actually thinks these are good ideas.
Mayor Bagley members of council, this is Jim golden, the chief financial officer. So the only thing we're adding here actually is miscible bonds. We have been investing in more mortgage backed securities. For some time, sorry, I have to put my video on I miss that. And so and so I guess we're pretty confident. We are in invested in a triple eight type investments when it comes to these securities that are mortgage backed through federal instrumentalities. As far as municipal bonds go, again, we would only be looking at the highly rated municipal bonds. So we have those built into that investment policy that you actually just acted on. We have those limits on on how high values need to be graded, so we don't get into any junk type bonds or junk document that that would be more of a high risk to the
Okay, thanks Jim. I you know, Muni bonds are usually pretty, pretty safe. I mean, if the if the, but we've already we've also seen this happen in other times, but I'm glad for that explanation. So if you're comfortable with it, I'm comfortable.
Thanks. Thank you.
All right. Let's go ahead and continue with the public hearing. Are there is there anybody who would like to speak at this public hearing?
You have two callers. Mayor, do any
one of them want to speak on ordinance 20 2034.
Caller whose phone number ends in 499. If you could please state your name and your address for the record and if Would you like to speak on this ordinance?
Are 499 you were in our waiting room and we let you back in if you do not want to talk at this point of the meeting, we'll just ask you to hang up.
Steph, go ahead and try and unmute her again, or him listening to the video.
Let's move on to the next caller. And then we'll put both of them back in the waiting room when the next caller is done.
Color his number ends in 418. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself please and please state your name and address for the record.
Yeah, this is Stan tool. I probably didn't want to talk on this one. I'm interested in the RV ordnance. And that's what I'd like to talk on. But this is kind of cuz I got kicked out of the public right to be heard. Because, you know, you grab the phone in it, you hang up and then he can't get back on again.
Instead, go ahead and take your three minutes free speech. It's a public hearing Go ahead.
Okay, yeah. Ryan, you know, I checked the local ordinances and they said, I can ask you guys questions. But this is on this RV thing. And we're right in the middle of a pandemic. And some people have more than enough time to get themselves busy and make special contact with public officials like yourself. Other people are not particularly people that are living in vehicles and save require special efforts to make sure that they come in and they have input into this. this. And you know, the city has been very harsh on people of lower income, things like excluding them from housing by not accepting Section A in all sorts all the way back to if you had skin was to Brown, you had to leave that town before sundown. So my thing is, is that you need to get people that are being affected by this ordinance involved. You have to make special contact with these people and work out something that people that no longer have housing and are using vehicle there's residents, you know, are not being treated like some sort of criminals where their property is being taken and they're being thrown in jail, just for trying to live. That's my two cents worth of Now.
All right, great. Thanks, Dan. All right, unless there's anybody else in the queue which doesn't sound like there is we're gonna go ahead and close the public hearing. We have a motion regarding orders. 2020 inch 34
All right, Dr. Waters.
All move. I just, we just Would you please bring that screen up? I can't thank you. I'll move approval of ordinance 2020 dash 34
it's been moved by Dr. waters and seconded by Councilmember Reid. Oh, actually it all affirming without you. Okay, seconded by Councilmember Duggal fairy signal for the comment or discussion. Let's go ahead and vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, ordinance 2020. That's 34 passes unanimously. Let's go ahead and move on to 10 be approved amended council Rules of Procedure rule 27 regarding boards. Are there any questions Councilmember Christiansen
Just filler questions tonight. I would like something clarified on page. Well, if this is page 10 of our rules of procedure, we're suggesting that when there are fewer applications and seats available counsel may make reappointments based solely on the application without requiring an interview of applicants.
Does that mean that if this is a,
um, that we could appoint somebody, even though we've never they aren't serving currently on the board, we would appoint them just based on the fact that there are more open seats. If so, I think that's a bad idea to just appoint somebody because without an interview without ever talking to them at all, based purely on the application, if it means that they Already are on the board and have served for a while on that board. I'm fine with that.
Mayor Bagley, Councilmember Christian Dunkin tonicity clerk, that, as we understand that paragraph, that's paragraph I that you're referring to, of rule 27. We understand that to be about reappointment. So you would only be looking at those who you've already interviewed who are currently serving that have applied to continue their service. So you would have had a chance to interview them already.
Okay, thanks. I just want to make sure you're welcome.
Joe does your hand up
or you just
I'm just holding my head
up just posing, just posing for the camera. Okay. All right. Um, then Seeing no further discussion. Let's go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anybody in the queue dot?
mayor, there is not the meetings been unlocked since the last public hearing.
All right. Let's go ahead and close the public. Then can we have a motion? Kazmir Christiansen?
zero 20 2034 b.
i think i think i Okay, I'll second that. I'll read I'll take the motion is a motion to approve the amended council rules and procedures specifically in rule 27. Regarding boards for item 10 be
All right. Okay. It's been Moved by Councillor Christiansen. It's been seconded by Dr. Waters. All in favor say aye.
Aye. Aye. Hi.
I opposed say nay. All right, Motion carries unanimously.
All right. Let's move back.
Counselor Christiansen. Let's go ahead and hear your statement on Ah, let's get that one out of the way quick.
Okay, thank you. Um, I was very happy to see this happen again. Just for the public. This is a really good program, the rewind program. It was the federal government put a hold on it because they were angry at Colorado standing up for immigrants. And so they weren't going to fund it. And we had to sue them. And we won the lawsuit. And so now we are back with the rewind program, which is a very good program to keep to help people who help young people who have wound up in well have needs for help of all kinds regarding the legal system, and this will keep them from continuing to get in trouble with the legal system, and help them in many other ways to get a good start. And so I was very happy to see this coming back. It's terrific. Thank you.
All right, Doc waters.
Thanks for your bag like I wasn't going to pull this off. But but in the event somebody did pull it off. I do have a question that I that I, that occurred to me. And that is, first of all, I want to ditto what Councilmember Christiansen expressed about appreciation for this stay in the state took in this in the willingness of Colorado to act on principle and the language that was in this program. Because we've done a program evaluation, we brought in an external evaluator of the rewind program and now with a grant to continue the program. I visited with Harold earlier today about when we would have a chance not to see the results of the program evaluation, because I don't think that our business, but I do think it's our business to get briefed on what did the staff learn from that evaluation that they'll apply as we as we approve a new grant, as the program note now moves forward. When when we when we have a chance to, to share basically what you learned, and how you're going to use what you learn to get better.
Karen, do you want to jump in? And then I'll jump in?
You bet mayor and Dr. waters and council members. So what our plan would be is to come back in a meeting in October to kind of depending on what the you know what the agendas are, but to to share the results, and what we've learned and how we are applying that to the program. So so we understand that Council was interested in that. And our intent would be to bring that back
in an appropriate meeting in October to do that.
Specific This is something that can that this is something because I I'm all for restorative justice. I'm all for keeping our kids out of the system, etc. But yeah, I'd be interested in here what we discovered too. Cuz I know if you'll recall, it's all fine and dandy I want to take the money and wanting to make the program better. But I do know that there were some concerns after the fact Anyway, there was concern concerns before the the evaluation was done. There's concerns after and so we'll just wait till October to hear that. Thank you very much. Probably you want to you pulled it you want to make a motion? Yeah.
Now I've lost my place. Okay. I will move resolution 20 2092.
I was first on the second but I was muted. So we'll go ahead and give that to Councillor Martin. Alright, Councillor Krishna made a motion and seconded by Councillor Martin. On favor say aye.
Opposed say nay. All right resolution 20 2092 passes unanimously. All right, Paulie, let's go ahead and address ordinance 20 2037.
Yes. Just having trouble unmuting myself. Okay, so, um, I believe all of us received a letter from Ruby Bogan today. And I think there are many good things in it. I don't agree with everything, but I do think that it would be worth discussing since this is our opportunity to discuss it. Item one was features subject to setbacks. And I would like to clarify that we aren't really going to she brings up The point of native roots now native roots is of course in Boulder County Land and it is on their private property design. So there isn't really anything we can do about that. But I do imagine that somewhere in the code it does not actually allow people to put advertising signs up on the Greenway. Is that correct? If it isn't, we should certainly you know, put that up.
there anybody like okay,
Mayor Bagley council member, Christiansen members of council, chat plenty manager. So the land development code would not allow for a sign to be put on any of the city property Greenway, or any kind of business like that. So that so that would not be allowed.
Okay, thank you. That's what I thought.
So, the second item is reduced setbacks and She suggests adding concentration of rare native fish, because that is something that we don't have in there. And key, the quote, the words, key use areas for migrant songbirds and key nesting areas for grassland birds. I would suggest we consider adding those two items to the reduced setbacks section. I would move I would make a motion that we add the phrases concentrations of very native fish and the phrase key use areas for migrant songbirds and key nesting areas for grassland birds. Do I have a second?
category toggle for a
All right, there's a motion on the table. I didn't catch exactly the language that we were providing. No, no, no. I mean, what I'm saying is I understood what the gist was. I just can't repeat it saying as the chair, hey, there's a motion and here it is. I'm going to have you repeat the language when it comes time to vote council member. Okay. But I guess my only concern is I went, I would wish me personally, it would be a lot easier. I think for legal staff. I view the first and second readings as the first one is for discussion. Second one should be just for approval. And, and this I think this would be a lot easier on legal if we could bring these things up on first reading, and instead of the second. But let's go ahead and can you go ahead and just repeat what the motion was Paulie, please, just the language
and and I see your point, Mary Bagley I do, but we've, if you remember, this discussion with Councilman Santos, we went round and round around.
Yeah, I'm not trying to I'm not trying. I'm just saying I just want to just, I'm just trying to get it right. So get the language out there and let's, let's hear it one more time. Please
get it. Okay. So the item for item five of this section, include the phrase concentrations of rare native fish to the list of species habitat features. One more time.
Sorry, I'm sorry,
I'm centration. The phrases concentration of rare native fish,
the word that go could you read it into the how do we do an item
five of the reduced setbacks?
Could you read it for us, please? How would it read?
I don't have that in front of me.
I could probably let that
all right. That's right. And then so you're just saying, just customer Martin. I'm sorry. Do you have it?
No, why don't I was getting ready. For the discussion,
okay, all right. So you're basically just saying that we add that section to the areas that are protected.
Add that phrase to
reduce the reduced setback section item five.
All right, and then what was the other one?
The other one is also for the reduced setbacks, item five, the phrases key use areas for migrant songbirds and key nesting areas for grassland birds. These are two things that are in the Fort Collins land use code. And we do have songbirds and grassland birds here that
meet what right and then so what would the what would the motion do mean what what is it
phrase key use areas for migrant songbirds and key nesting areas for grassland birds to the reduced setback section number V, or
Friday, so it would be so we couldn't We would not be encroaching upon these areas.
All right, Eugene, do you have any how bad your stomach twisting right now?
Marin council Eugene Mae city attorney, we also have Teresa Tate on deputy city attorney who worked on this ordinance. I think I've got it. I think I'm on page 204 of the packet. And there is a list of habitat features being protected by this ordinance. And to that we would add concentrations of rare name fish, and
migratory and songbirds as I don't have Ruby's email. So,
okay, that makes sense. So basically, okay, that okay, all right now, at least at least, we at least understand now what we're going to be voting on I think so that's good.
songbirds and grassland Yeah,
okay, perfect. Perfect. Councillor Martin.
Thank you Mayor Begley, Mr. burchette
do we not have um blanket language that requires any application for a variance which is what a reduced setback would be to have an evaluation of of sensitive wildlife and habitat already that does not require an enumeration or am I out of date on that?
Mayor Bagley, council member Martin, members of council, we have the ability to request that all of our reports look at and identify any species or animals on the property. The the trick I think and in the concern from the people Have some concerns with the way this is not as specific is that sometimes we do not know of all of the species that are on a property. So we are dependent upon Natural Resources staff and David Belle's group to help us identify and make sure that those reports have looked at all aspects of the property as an example, the fish species that may be in a section of the creek or river.
it doesn't give me heartburn to add this into the ordinance as a portion or as a criteria for the council to consider when you're looking at whether or not to grant a variance. And I think in some respects, it does give the council additional information that if there were a sensitive or an endangered fish, for example, in this section of Creek where someone was trying to get a variance that that would potentially do irreparable Well harm, it would be a way for you to make that decision and deny that variance along with the evaluation system through the CMS. So I don't see a problem with adding that language if the council chooses to do so. But I do think the code allows us to ask anybody to expand upon their reports to address these kinds of issues. But I don't see a harm in adding this.
Okay. Well, that was my question was is the does the SDS not already allow
us to bring in
our parks and wildlife specialists to
really evaluate whether this is necessary or not.
And as part of customer Martin is, you are correct as part of the CS part of the evaluation that takes place we use David Bell and his staff and doing those analysis. The CES that the council would review. So we have that ability right now.
Okay, so that was my point was that it doesn't seem there's nothing wrong with it, it just seems superfluous because we already have the ability to protect those populations.
Right customer Christiansen
I believe this is brought up because the the only way we know what we don't do the consultation, the developers hire consultant and the consultants are varying degrees of quality like any other profession, and some of them are not really aware of some of these things. So the only way we would be aware of the actual wildlife on the property is through the consultant and you don't want the consultant to the developer to waste money having to go back and get the consultant to do another review of stuff. We want this just to be upfront. They know that they should be looking for this sort of thing. This is not necessary. certainly something that we, that that all consultants, environmental consultants are aware of one would think they would be, but that's, you know, that's not always true. And it's also to draw us into alignment with the county comprehensive plan. And that would be a good thing that would be better for us to approach these things on a county wide basis because the birds fly all over the county. So, you know, why not just be specific enough to begin with? saves everyone time and money.
Okay. So there's a motion on the table. All in favor, so sorry, Dr. Waters.
Yeah, thanks. I have no reason to not think this is a good idea. I just would like to hear since David's name has been used several times. Do we have anybody on this in the session from our natural resources? group that has a thought about this or guidance or comment. I see David down there would be good to hear from David before we cast a vote.
Yeah, near Constantine waters, I think everything's been said is is is accurate that superflous is probably better word than belts and suspenders. But that's kind of what it is that the rules are there, we can enforce it. And I would say you do have good wildlife staff that when we do have diamonds coming in from consultants along the creek, and we don't see in reference to fishes, we go back to them and say, you need to look at this. So have that language there, as has been stated me, put that up front, but it's something that staff is already looking at.
Well, so it sounds to me that if we put it in it's no harm no foul to make Ms. Bowman happy and it won't be insult any Councilmember Christiansen that's what I'm hearing. So let's go ahead and vote. All in favor say aye.
Aye. Aye. Hi. All opposed say nay.
All right, there we go. We got her done. Then consent item, see or is 20 2008. No. Dourdan? Well, we amended it but we didn't pass the ordinance. The motion was just to add the language. So now Do we have I'll move that we pass orders 2020 dash 37 as amended. Second, Kazmir Christiansen
you're muted Polly. Sorry. I'm sure it was really funny what you said.
I do have some more things. But if you want to vote, well, we just did vote on this.
Right. So there's a motion on the floor to pass orders. 20 2037 as amended. Seeing no further question comments or concerns go and vote All in favor of sorry, Counselor Christiansen. Give other amendments.
All right. Go ahead. Okay.
Under the review procedure, I would like to add the phrase in consultation with the Natural Resources Division,
copyright now reads the planning director may waive or approve minor modifications of any development standard or review criteria contained in the section if the planning director finds that Ababa, I would like to insert in consultation with the Natural Resources Division after the planning director.
That would mean who specifically Harold would you understand what that means?
It means just just David to the division implies division.
Though in this case today would be Joanie.
She makes those decisions she she does consult with natural resources if she's making it. This would just make that as part of the process that she might have to
get is anyone so it's it's it's it's somebody opposed? I'd rule it out of order, but it could we go through council member Christensen's items and then include them all in one motion. If somebody has something they don't like, make a point of order and pull it out. Does that make sense? That Okay,
does that correct? I want to make sure I need to go back does that correct? What I stated? All right,
Harold, yes, it is. Johnny does consult.
All right. So why don't you got Paulie?
Okay, I'm on
724 No, no on 714 2020 Councilman Rodriguez made an amendment to the land development code which we approved
specifying that any app It comes to the planning and zoning commission as an end as a Jason city owner operated space and parks. Most have city council approval.
We okay that
that does not seem to be part of this.
Right. Is there is there anything else pertaining to orders 2020 uS 37
protection to the streams and creeks and wetlands.
I think that is part of this. No, hey, um,
air. Go ahead,
Don. So in my council communication that was presented to the council back on July 14 2020. there that was item number seven in there. And I asked council to allow us to bring that back as a separate ordinance because it would was the change was required by making changes to different sections of the land development code. The Council approved all of staff's recommendations at that meeting. So we're bringing that back. After we get this one done, we're hoping to get that along with a couple of other housekeeping items brought to you here in October.
Thank you, Don. I forgot about that. Apparently, Chase.
Okay. Is there is there something else? Is that it? Okay. So there's a motion on the table the first so we'll take it as a motion. And I'll second it that your motion was to,
to add the phrase in consultation with the Natural Resources Division after the planning director.
That's it all in favor say aye.
What section is that? Can you
give me a site,
though? Don't be don't who cares about the specifics, Eugene, there'll be a lawyer. Okay. I'm just kidding. Let's
count them. Mayor council members may or may I interject? Sure. that language is currently contained in the revisions. If you'll look at page 204 of your packet Well, you know, we got to know where to put the language and so this is a quite what you're looking for let us know. But what I'm looking at is item five modification of the setback standard, which I believe is what Councilmember Christiansen was referring to. So if we look at five B increased setbacks, it states the Planning and Development Services Director in consultation with the public works and Natural Resources department may increase the setbacks. Okay. And then it goes on from there, but I believe that language is already contained in the revision.
Would you agree Polly?
And then I'll call him Councillor Martin didn't think so.
Okay, then I won't second it but Councillor
well, Aye. Aye. Aye. I think that Mr. Bell had it right. That means I read Miss Bowman's list. And it seems to me that the what we're doing is is taking the flexibility out of this ordinance by subverting the idea of having the SDS tool so that it could be a living document that we would include in the evaluations, what we needed to include in the evaluations, if we put it in the code. As specifics like population officials and songbirds, then we are going to be faced with a precedent that says we have to amend this code every time we come up with a new sensitivity in the riparian area. Whereas with the more generalized approach that we took last year. We can just be adaptive and I trust Mr. Bell and his staff to be on top of what needs to be done.
I am. I'm really making a comment about the revised ordinance. I like what's there. And now I appreciate what Councilmember Barton just said. But if Dave and his team are comfortable with a language recommended by Ruby that that's okay with me. I do think attorney Tate was spot on with her, pointing us to the language in this ordinance that says exactly. And we talked about that. I mean, that was a big deal when we saw the last draft of this and they picked it up. What I really want to say is this. Both Eugene and Miss Taylor refer to a page number in their materials. I want to say to the staff, you've constructed their materials in a different format than ours. So they refer to page 204. We don't have a page 204. Ours is organized differently. So if we're going to do it this way, it would be really good to get everybody on the same in the same format. Because I can tell you, it's gonna get real frustrating when when a staff member points me to a page, and I don't have those pages in my materials, because I don't, because mine are formatted very differently. They're still using a Dropbox apparently, with a continuous PDF. So not about substance. We're about form. If we're going to have if we're going to have a conversation. We have a format so we can have a conversation without trying to figure out page numbers.
Thank you. All right. So there's no motion on the table other than there is a motion to pass ordinance 2020 s 37, as previously amended and was seconded by Councillor Martin. All in favor say aye. Aye.
Aye aye. Aye.
Opposed say nay. All right, ordinance 20 2037 passes unanimously. Look at that. It's 837 All right, let's move on to I as James just didn't I just Jinx this? I'm sure I did. Um, let's go ahead and move on to general business items. public hearing regarding law fairgrounds marketplace business improvement district, specifically ordinance 2020 dash 38. It's a bill for an ordinance organizing the LFM business improvement district providing for an election of the board of directors the district and approving the 2020 2021 operating plan and budget for the district. public hearing and second reading scheduled for September 22 2020. So do we have a presentation on this? I don't I don't think we do. We did it last week. Right. Tony?
Um, Mayor Bagley members of council just real quick. Your packet does outline rather well the interest or the petition that was submitted. We did go over it, I can tell you that this is a 16 acre parcel that's on hoever Road, just south of Rogers road and immediately north of the Home Depot property, the property in question or upon which they would establish the district is 100% commercial. And with that we do have the legal counsel representing the applicant, Russell Dykstra is here to address any concerns or answer any questions the city council would have. And we also have with us tonight, Carolyn white representing the city's interest.
Alright, so I guess that if nobody has any questions, we can go ahead and vote as I just want to. Okay. Well, Connie, I just want to reiterate, I've said this before Tony, there's a piece of land, the city and the council, we have spent a lot of time on. And so I just, I just want to make sure that this just isn't the next week. iteration is an attempt to, to develop a piece of property that we're going to spend considerable city considerable amounts of time and city resources on when the the folks behind it don't really have a plan the resources so you don't need to you don't need to respond now. It's just that I don't know who else I speak for. But I don't want to spend a lot of time on this as soon as we if this isn't making progress, I want to know about it, so that we don't spend time on it. That makes sense.
Yes, Mayor Bagley and against Dykstra is here if you'd like to ask him any specific
I don't need questions. So I've been so far so good for Mr. Dykstra. It's just that every time the project comes back, it's a new face. And so it's um, I'm not I just letting everybody know that. Just if it's going to be on the agenda, and we're going to be developing or contributing resources to this. I just want to make sure that the right experts And the consultants are in place and it moves along. So Dr. Waters.
Thanks very badly. I have several questions. Can I run through all this? Sure. It's a short list but to begin with, early in the in the accounts communication, we know this is true for any application for a special district is the term extraordinary that there's an extraordinary expense to do what has to be done. And I and I read in the incluant enclosure about the infrastructure work that has to be done the connector road etc. But, but in this in this application, as I raised the same question, when we approved the metro district, the only one we've approved, but what's the standard or criteria for extraordinary expense. We had a number in in that application we have a number in this application. The numbers are very different. The size of the projects I get I understand are very different. One was residential ones commercial but the It still leaves a question for me of Is there a criteria? Tony, is there a legal criteria? It's just kind of a you spitballing. How do we determine what satisfies the standard of extraordinary in this in any case?
Mayor Bagley councilor waters. In this instance, this particular district, the business improvement district is not covered under our current special district ordinance. It's a totally separate requirement under state statute or allowance under state statute, I should say. I could ask Carolyn white to weigh in as to what her understanding of what would constitute some of the requirements of the operating plan because again, they operate under a totally different rules than what our current ordinance allows for special districts.
I get that the rationale for the proposal is I think Fundamentally based on the expense associated with the infrastructure development in this commercial district, and in the the word is extraordinary the numbers $12 million for infrastructure costs. Is there a threshold or a standard to determine what is or is not extraordinary? Or is that just a total judgment call?
Well, right now, because we have no ordinance given us guidance to that matter, it's pretty much open as to what constitutes that, but hopefully, maybe Carolyn could just weigh in her thoughts on that matter, Carolyn?
Yeah, sure. Um, Mayor Council, and Dr. Waters, Carolyn white special counsel to Longmont for redevelopment. And the term extraordinary may have been used by the applicant in their application. And we can ask them what they may meant by that they probably were referencing like relative to other developments, but as a practical matter, extraordinary is not a criterion in either the statute or your code that applicable to this analysis? So the question isn't whether you think it's extraordinary or not, it's whether you think it's met the criteria in the state statute. And I can go through some of what those are, if you would like. Or you could ask the applicant to explain what they meant by extraordinary. That's not a legal criterion. Okay.
I didn't use the term that I'd have to go back and maybe it was accounts communication in their in their actual application. But that's the term.
Thank you, Dr. Waters. It's a good question that I've struggled with for 20 years plus of doing this. each jurisdiction determines that individually in our case, we feel that this is extraordinary because of the use of over 30% of the property for public purposes. Also for the cost of those Public improvements, especially the regional type that don't directly benefit this property but also benefit a larger area. In our situation, we feel those costs and the loss of the land to make up for those costs, makes this an extraordinary circumstance. But generally I agree with Carolyn and I there is no statutory criteria we can point you to. It's just a judgment call on behalf of the jurisdiction.
Building on that, and may you may be the you probably are the right person to ask the the, the $12 million that was referenced, and to be to be raised through the sale of bonds. Does that represent 100% 1% of the total cost of of the extraordinary cost? Because the $12 million represent
Well, to be clear, and Mr. Speaker brought this up as well, that 12 million is a max capacity for the district, we anticipate that the actual bonds that would be issued would be somewhere in that six to $7 million range, we usually include a little extra buffer in our maximum so that if circumstances change costs increase, whatever the circumstances, we don't have to go back and get a subsequent approval for additional capacity. So we're including about six to 7 million to get to your question, even at that level, what portion of those extraordinary costs that would cover most of those costs? And the reason why we're asking to cover most of those is because with that 30% loss of the developable land and Such a small project, we don't have a lot of makeup room and capacity in the project to fund those extraordinary costs. So, in this case, we're losing about three, three and a half acres of developable land, due to the regional infrastructure and the road and the drainage basins. So normally, a developer could absorb some portion of that by selling that three and a half acres to help offset those costs. In this case, there's only 16 acres total. So if you lose three, three plus acres of developable land, that's a sizable chunk to lose to help offset those costs.
So for all intents and purposes, whatever, whatever numbers 6 billion plus the cost of infrastructure 100% of that would because would be covered, too. Bond sale bonds.
Building on that, where does the risk who holds the risk or who assumes the risk to guarantee the service of this death? Right
under under the bond documents and under state statute, the district alone would be responsible to service those bonds. Now in the secondary layer is the risk profile for those bonds is 100%. With the bond holder, the district when we issue the bonds would make a pledge and say we will impose x mils of property tax on this property and so long as we do that faithfully every year. That is that is the only obligation of the district if that property tax revenue isn't sufficient To meet the bond payments, the risk of any shortfall is on the bond holder.
Good. Those are my questions on finance. I have two other questions, one just on terms of governance. I was a little confused, because it makes reference to the city council or the municipality appointing council members or directors. And then I see the names of the directors recommended for this. So maybe this is a Carolyn question. Is this a two step that based that we make an appointment, we make an appointment based on their recommendations if we want to, we could we could choose to approve or not approve any of their recommendations, or appoint someone else? And then they serve until they're elected, and the only electors in that case would be them. Is that the case? Is that the way it goes?
Um, I agree with the characterization of the two step process, right. They can't hold an election yet because they're not formed yet. As a district, so you have to appoint them in the interim until the district becomes formed, and then they can hold an election at the appropriate time and then those persons can stand for election. You could in theory appoint other persons than those who have been recommended, but they have to be qualified under the statutory requirements. And given the requirement that they be owners of businesses or property within the district, there probably aren't any other persons who are qualified that you could appoint.
So that is
a two step process is the way it's going to play out. Yes, in our action, if we approve this ordinance would basically be to appoint those people recommended in the application. That's right. Last question. I didn't see anywhere in the application and maybe because it's it's just not even an option that directors are compensated are they are those who serve on the on the board of directors of a business improvement district, are they compensated?
I need to look up to confirm that maybe Ross knows off the top of his head. I believe the only compensation they can receive has to do with certain per diem and expense costs. They cannot receive, you know, salary type compensation,
but that's correct. They can receive a per diem per state statute. The vi D statute isn't expressed on that. We represent 43 vi DS, every one of them follows the title 32 requirement that it's $100 per diem per meeting up to a maximum of 24 meetings a year and that's it.
All right. Do we have a motion pertaining to orders 2020 is 38.
I would move ordinance 2020 dash 38.
I'll second. All right. All in favor say aye.
Opposed say nay.
All right, the ordinance carry six to one with Councilmember Christiansen opposed. All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Dykstra. Thanks. All right. Let's go ahead and move on to 2021 budget presentation.
The goal here this is this may be
a more lengthy presentation. Do you all want to take a quick break?
What is lengthy?
At least 90 minutes?
At least? Yeah,
that I want to have,
at least for a while. All right, let's take a five minute break. We'll come back.
12345 their shifts. All right, Jim.
Go ahead and
start this movie. All right, Mayor Mitch Bagley, members of council Jim golden, Chief Financial Officer. So this is the first of our 2021 budget presentations this evening. We were going to start off with a budget tutorial. Teresa belie was going to make that presentation. Unfortunately, she wasn't able to be with us this evening. So we're gonna defer that to next week. But we'll start then with the compensation plan and Joanne z is the Chief Human Resources officer is going to make that presentation if Steffi can get us that first PowerPoint on the compensation plan, that would be great.
Jim, that's gonna be me. The first
person. That's okay.
So Good evening mayor, members of council Joanne zS Chief Human Resources officer. I would like to take a few minutes tonight Just to speak to you about employee compensation and our budget recommendations in light of the current labor market outlook. As you're aware, this is a very volatile time for economic projections. Our compensation recommendations are made with portability in mind and also look towards flexibility as we're able to obtain additional information as we move into 2021.
Next slide, Susan.
So the first thing that I'd like to take a look at is just in terms of the market itself, where we're at with turnover. I apologize where we're at with unemployment data, and so the data We have right now is from August 21. It is the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It does not match because the Bureau of Labor Statistics will report Colorado as a state before it will report the counties. So the data that you're looking at there for Colorado is July data. The data that you're looking at there for June is the counties because they do like behind because of them lagging behind and because of the volatility we have right now. Those numbers look higher in the counties. I do suspect that when we get those numbers in for July, that those will start to even out for the counties. The reason that those counties are specified is because that is what the Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates. I cannot unfortunately get one specifically for Longmont. I also cannot get one that incorporates weld County, so we're dealing with the data that they're able to provide to us.
As you'll probably be hearing throughout all of these budgets,
presentations. compensation is no different in this environment, it is an uncertain environment. We do typically create compensation plans from projections. Those projections are done towards the end of each year. And they come in towards the beginning of the following year. We did get those at the beginning of 2020. However, we received them in February and the individuals that completed them, completed them at the end of 2019. As we started to get information from the survey respondents, what we were seeing, especially in other cities is that what they provided at the end of 2019, may no longer be valid. So we did not want to use those surveys today to create a compensation plan because we just were not sure if they were valid. So rather than do that, we continue to use the benchmarks that we have in place currently. And then we want to be able to take a look as the market changes and make adjustments as we feel that they're stabilizing. We do have a Little bit of information that his most recent survey, the Society for Human Resource Management has a projection on August 17, where they were saying that they're expecting about a 1.9% range increase across employers and a 3% wage growth for existing employees. It's a good starting point benchmark. It is a national benchmark, and it is not specific to government. So it's, I guess, the beginning of a start, but not something that we feel that we're able to rely on at this point. What we do believe is that in the fall of 2020, we will start to get survey updates, those are going to be a little bit more aggregate. So we will see things like Colorado Municipal League provide information as a whole similar to that society for human resource management. And then going forward we will start to get surveys in early 2021. That will just like last year, start to incorporate the end of 2020.
Next slide, please.
turnover, I want to give a little bit of information. Even though the market has a pretty high unemployment rate, we do have a relatively low turnover rate within the city. It is still something we want to monitor. And we want to make sure that we're caring for we are remaining steady with the turnover, we're seeing a pretty consistent number from what I've seen in prior years, as well as we're running it 8.74%. And when we're looking at the beginning half of 2020, that's running at 5.8%. So year to date, we do also want to monitor retirements, we did have, we have about a 20 per year. Again, those are remaining on track. We have a large percentage of employees that are currently or soon eligible for retirement. So even though they're not a large percentage of our turnover, so we do expect that we're going to have additional employees that we need to make sure that we're monitoring and then we're tracking for plans. And the next slide we'll go into a little bit of detail on that if we pull that up So this is our projection for retirement eligibility. It's a little bit small, but what it's showing is that we have, over the next two years, we will have about 264 of our employees or about a quarter of our employees who are eligible to retire. So there is relatively little bit of a high unemployment rate at this point that may or may not stabilize a little bit more, we still have a pretty significant need to make sure that we're being competitive, that we're retaining individuals as long as they're willing to work for us. And also that we're able to be competitive when we need to fill those positions. Next slide please.
Many of you have probably seen this slide before. This is our compensation philosophy. And so this is what we're working towards. And what we always say that we want to provide prevailing market rates. We do know that we need to be a value prop For our taxpayers, we also know that we have pretty strong efficiencies. And what we see is that our staffing is matching other cities. But our value is that we are providing many more services than most of those cities are. So we see that we have pretty strong efficiencies. We want to make sure that we're asking our employees to do more with less that we are compensating them for that we're retaining them. Currently what we're doing is benchmarking our salaries to 101%. We have had a goal for a few years now to move to 102%. As funding levels allow, in this budget, we are not looking to move but we are looking to retain that hundred and 1% that we've already established. Next slide please.
So essentially for 2021 to start, we are not making any market adjustment for employees. We're just looking to keep those salary ranges where they are we have made some space in the budget to move employees who were under their market salary towards that market salary. So if they're below that rate, they can move towards it. But the rate itself is not changing. We also have looked to budget for our exceptional pay process. And so that process employees are nominated for that. If the 21 budget would allow in the future going forward, then we would be prepared at that point with some market data that we feel like we can rely on so that we can evaluate it and make some additional recommendations for adjustments.
Next slide, please.
This is just a little bit of additional detail on that exceptional pay program. Essentially what that program is set up for is to reward employees who are going above and beyond their regular performance. So it's not just doing your job, it's doing something that's making a significant contribution to the organization. We have that budgeted at 2% of salary and what happens with that program is that nominations are evaluated by the department director. They're nominated. They go through a review process with Harold and myself.
Next slide, please.
Joanne, I popped out of that hang on just a second. Sure.
And you saw the Thank you. So when you're, you know, this part's almost done. I'm just a little bit of notes in terms of the future compensation, direct direction. What we're hoping is that as we have the ability, that we will go ahead and start to move towards that PE target. I don't know that that's going to happen in the near future. But we do want to keep that on there as a goal. It's been something that has been a goal. We also want to allow for that range movement within our step positions.
We want to make sure that we're continuing to refine our data sources. And if we do need to if the economy stabilizes and 2021 revenue exceeds projections, We're hitting that point where we really want to be able to make that change and we're able to make that change, then we want to be ready to move on. So those are our goals going forward.
Next slide, please.
is just some basic information on where we're headed with compensation.
Happy to answer any questions.
Alright, let's move on. I don't see any questions. All right, we're gonna move on to pensions and health benefits. Susan, if you could put up that PowerPoint. Appreciate that. We did include info in the budget message on these topics. So these Be brief presentations are really meant to complement OR supplement the info that work was in the budget message. So the next slide please
quick slide Susan.
stuffs gonna try and run this Well, okay, Steph, can you put it into presentation mode? It should be the icon at the bottom near your zoom.
Do you see that?
This isn't Can you just go with it?
I'm on it. So out
of that, thank you.
I'm gonna begin talking about the old higher pension plans. So the mayor and the mayor Pro Tem are both on the old higher pension boards and those are defined better If plans and they have an annual actuarial review performed performed on them each year, I included a copy of the PowerPoint that we received from the actuary just last month we get those reports in August of each year. And that was included for each of the defined benefit plans included in your packet for your information purposes, the actual reports themselves are also available off the finance webpage, just want to make sure that all the council is able to access the same level of information as the board members. So each of these two old higher plans they are only down to eight members each. The old higher police plan has an unfunded liability the share of hundred and $45,197 it's 89.3% funded so we have included the required actual contribution of $23,174 in the 2021 proposed budget, that'll amortize the liability of the police plan over the remaining expected life for the participants. The old fire old high of fire plan actually has a surplus it has a negative unfunded liability of over $400,000. So it's 116% funded, so there is no contribution requirement for that plan. Next slide. Please. Don't talk about the general Employees Retirement Plan. And it's also a defined benefit plan. The gerbe plan has been has had a history traditionally of being fully funded until 2008. The benefit increases are not able to be built into this plan under Tabor unless the plan were to reach fully funded status, which again, it has Been all the way through 2008. And then when we had the economic downturn, this plan did take quite a drop in its funding level. And we've been working on trying to get it back to a fully funded status. So we've been trying to be more aggressive about that in recent years. Next slide, please.
In first of all in 2011, in response to that downturn, and be trying to get back to fully funded status, we did make changes to the plan and to the benefits in the plan. We created a new tier of employee participants. So anyone that was hired prior to 2011 is considered a tier one employee. 2012 afterwards or tier two employees, and their early retirement benefits are different from what they are for the employees that were hired prior to 2012. That was Again, an attempt to try to reduce costs. At the same time, what we did is we we have a lower contribution level for tier two employees since they're not getting the same level of benefit. In 2016, the grip board made a change our funding policy to amortize the liability over a closed 30 year period. So it was previously over an open period which continued to revolve. So under a closed period, we have a target, we move towards that target to reach fully funded over that 30 years long period of time, a significant period of time, but we are making progress towards that. Next slide, please. So, that period will be 26 years from January 1 2019. So another 25 years or so to go before it would reach that status under the current required contribution scenarios. gains and losses are smoothed on an actuarial basis. So what the actuary does is when there's when it's gains or losses from our investments, they've figured them out so that the impact is smoothed over five years. So then we don't have a volatile contribution requirement. So in 2019, our performance was strong investment. We had over 19% actual return on investments. So in 2020, our report we gave us reported an unfunded liability for the group of 22 point 6 million and making an 87.9% funded so we lost a little bit of ground because we had a unfunded liability the year before of 20 point 1,000,088.6% funding.
So in the budget message, we We've laid out all the detail on the history of the contributions to this plan and how it's grown over time. We are recommending that in this budget that the contributions well actually actuarial a recommendation here is that the contribution requirements going from 13.9% to 14.2% of compensation. So and this next in the next bullet here is incorrect. Its proposed 2021 budget is including an increase in the city's contribution requirement, going from 8% to 8.4%. explained the tier one and tier two employees. Currently, a tier one employee has a 6% contribution requirement. tier two employees are always 1% below the tier one employee contribution requirements, so they have a 5% contribution requirement. I really wouldn't put in a focus on this. blended percentage in the past, and this year, we are looking at that closer so that it's a 5.4% blend on this contribution requirement for employees. Currently, it's what about what it generates when you mix in tier one to tier two employees. Next slide please. So the contributions for 2021 are proposed is 8.4%. City and add net to the 5.4% employee. It's a below the total required contribution of 14.2%. And normally, we would recommend an increase in employee contributions because of the fact that there's no increase in in the pay plan this year. We shied away from doing that in this year's budget to defer that till hopefully next year. In the meantime, while we are recommending since you have been Stan these actuary studies We get them in August. It's telling us what we should be contributing in throughout to 2020. So it's really coming in arrears and a little bit too late for us to react from a budgetary level. So we have had to make adjustments on fly. Last year when I talked to the council at this point in time about the the group plan made a recommendation that we make up for the shortfall and contribution below the requirement by transferring $400,000 from the health benefit from it's a practice that we did after the downturn in 2008, when we had a very large increase to our contribution requirement. So we recommended it again last year, along with we had increased employee contributions from 5.8% to 6% for 2020.
So after I
made those recommendations to y'all, and I think the council accepted those That time, got busy and did everything else. And I never brought them back to you for action. So what you will see in the coming weeks is that we will still need to make that 400,000 contribution that we intended to make last year. And we're recommending right here that we make another 400,000 contribution for 2020 for the deficit that we are currently experiencing in our contributions being below the actual estimate. And then for 2021, it would be another $200,000 to close that gap again. So all of that would be coming from the health benefit Fund, which I'll be talking about in
starting in a couple of seconds here.
So that's pretty much would get us back on track to being able to meet those actual contribution requirements in the long run. So hopefully with that, pay increases next year. That and plus also, hopefully better returns on our investments, we'll be able to narrow those gaps as we move forward. Next slide please.
So now the health benefit funds.
the council communication does have some information on it that is explaining how we budget for employee benefits each year for the health benefit Fund. The health benefit fund is is a pooled fund. It's an internal Service Fund where we take contributions from or from throughout the organization from the operating funds. We take employee contributions towards premiums, and this is where we pay for our premiums for health insurance, as well as dental life and EAP. So in addition to that, we These are small amounts compared to those but we also Include include these additional benefits that are shown here on this slide wellness costs, police and fire physicals. And then as I just was referring to this is the 2021 budget recommendations. So this has 2000 $200,000 for the actuarial liability. And then the health benefit fund fund balance is projected to end 2020 at a balance of over $9.38 million. Our projections for the 2021 are that it's going to pretty much remain stable and maintain that level balance as part of the council communication. There's an attachment. See in there that is the performer that's showing you three years of the health benefit fund to 2019 actual our projections for 2020 and what we're budgeting for 21 Next slide please. So, in the 220 to 2021 proposed budget or health benefits, based on negotiated cost with Kaiser of 7.11% increase for 21 cents to 2007 archives of costs have ADD, at average an aggregated blend premium increase of 4.51%. And that's compared to industry averages here and this, this isn't very current, but it's probably seven to 11% or higher at this point in time. So we have no increase in any other premiums from any of the insurances that are coming from the health benefit fund this year because we had negotiated two year deals last year on each of the other ones. So for 2021, the only increase is coming for our health benefits. So we were able to To maintain the health benefit fund contributions from the different operating funds at 16 and a half percent of salary, which is this will be the third straight year that we're able to keep that at 16.5%. Any questions on pension or health benefits?
Thanks, Jim. Um, just to clarify the individual contributions to the to the
retirement program, I think it's the retirement program.
I understand in the presentation,
the individual contribution
and maybe this is maybe I need to sort this is maybe this is the Health Fund from 5.8% to 6%. We'll go back to that slide.
Susan, maybe if you can go back. Well,
while you are
I'll, that's correct. The contributions went from 5.8% to 6%. For 2020
for the retirement program,
but their current plan? That's correct, it's three times.
So if I if I think about the earlier presentation about compensation, we're going to maintain their proposal is to maintain salary ranges in 2021, where they are in 2020. People on who are on who are still moving through their salary ranges, would get whatever that step increases. People at the top of their rages would be frozen. Is that fair?
up most individuals in the open range who are at market or above probably be be frozen where they're at those that are below market would be, have an opportunity to move up words as 5% step employees actually police and fire are not in the current plan and we only have a few step employees in the current plan in the in the electric department.
So, so my question specifically, I'm sorry, you're on where you're gonna win?
Well, yeah Sona to kind of be clear on that one. So in terms of step plans, we have police fire and then the LPC line line positions. They're in steps and then the majority of our other staff are in the open range positions. And so if they're behind the 2020, market, correct, Jim versus 2019 market, make sure the 2020 market, if they're behind the 2020 market, they can move up as much as 5%. But if you're at market, you're frozen.
Yeah. So if for those employees who are at market, and I don't know what percentage that represents, for all intents and purposes, is it fair to say That their, their their salary would be reduced by point 2%. Because of the additional contribution
to the, to the retirement plan,
no actually so that 5.8 to 6% took place at the beginning of 2020. We did instituted for our employees that
was in this year,
right? I just need to bring it back to the council to make that amendment in the plan. But we did Institute it so it is 6% so it's exactly why we're not increasing it beyond 6%. This year is for the reason that you're bringing up
all right, because because this is a much effects last year, because we put through this because it because it does have this differential effect right for folks who are at the top but but it's been a year late with my question, and I get this out. I appreciate the sensitivity to it and I appreciate the appreciate the explanation because you know where I was going. Okay, back.
Then, before we leave this, could I ask one more thing?
Sure. And I should have asked it when Joanne did her presentation and I was slow on the draw with my hand up. Um, you know, the table. This is less about what we just heard from Jim than then what we should be anticipating in terms of turnover, just through retirements without without getting into individual information that we shouldn't have access to. Is there some way for us to get an idea beyond that table, Joanne, that you laid out? What should we should be anticipating at least at the senior level in terms of projected or anticipated retirement dates?
I think it's a little bit of a challenge
to answer only because sometimes you could, you know, look at an individual and they could be totally ready from an age perspective and they decide to stay longer. It tends to be a pretty individual decision on Having said that, though, I know a number of our senior leaders are pretty open with their supervisors. So I have seen a decent amount of time for planning in most cases, I haven't seen anybody from the senior leadership. You know, just just take, you know, just leave quickly.
I have no doubt. Because we have, because I've heard from you enough, I have no doubt that you and here Holden, and our senior staff have pretty, pretty good succession plans in place. It's a constant conversation, I'm sure. But I would be, however, whatever level of detail you could share, so that we have some idea of what cow this or some future councils should be anticipating would be helpful, just because there's so many decisions we made that potentially influence the decisions they make, right? Yeah. I just like to be mindful of what I might be doing on a Tuesday night. that contributes to an accelerated decision. decision by one of our senior staff members.
So, if I
can jump in and answer that question. So specifically, as it relates to the senior staff in the group that I meet with succession planning has been a significant topic of conversation amongst all of us. There are a significant number that are eligible within the next year or two. And so that has been a significant focus on my mind. And you've seen some of this. So, you know, you all have seen Tom Romeo's who is eligible, Mike Butler, who is eligible, that is something that is that we have to work on and we have to be cognizant of because there and it's not just that senior staff level it is. It is also the level before below them, where we have a lot of folks that have been here, you know, for a significant period of time. And as you've heard me talk about this, this is an issue coming at us. And we're working to really work with staff on that succession planning, that's part of the structure that you're seeing is build as we're bringing things together, so we can have multiple people digging into it, part of where you're seeing me move to play some attention, so that I can understand succession plans. So it is going to be an issue for us
in the next few years, kind of tell you what's also happening with my within our industry in general. I think the things that we're concerned about is that ongoing backfill, because we are hearing that there's fewer and fewer people who want to get into this line of work. So there's really two things coming at us right now. And, and I know that, you know, just my Alumni Association, you know, recruiting people to get an NPA or these types of things, they're reaching out to us based on What we're seeing so multiple issues in play for us right now, succession planning, recruitment or retention, also then looking at recruitment and how you build that pipeline as well.
So you're telling me that people are just lining up in droves to go work for cities that work for councils and all the public scrutiny and pressure you all live with every day? Gee, what a surprise. Thanks.
All right, Jim. Keep going,
please. All right, we're going to move into the tip presentation. Now, Susan, if you could put up that PowerPoint. I'll start to make some comments to introduce it. So the ccip It's a planning document that shows all the infrastructure needs of the city over the next five years. It's a collection of capital projects. Basically. They're either new or placements of or improvements to infrastructure that has a minimum life expectancy. Five years and a minimum cost of at least $10,000. Next slide. So are 21 to 25 proposed tip is a total of 200 and almost $244 million over five years. Only the first year 2021 will actually be appropriated. Although the council does act to adopt the whole ci P. The other four years represent plans, but the projects are considered to be funded. This slide shows the breakdown of the 240 $4 million by category. So next slide please. This here is showing the amount of the funded ci pre p projects by year. And then the next slide please. So this is the breakdown of 2021 the first year of the ccip and this is also bye bye Project category. So the individual projects they're included in ci p document on pages 11 and 12. And then there's individual pages for each and every one of those projects. But 11 and 12 does break down each of the projects that are in each of these nine, so categories in the left side of the slide. So there's where you can get more detailed information on that we're going to be making some presentations, tonight on on projects for for both 2021 as well as some that are already in in process. And then also actually point out that within the tip on pages 14 to 16, you get all five years of projects are all listed in there as well. So with that next slide is a cover slide that is showing you the staff that will be involved in making the presentation to you this evening. I'm going to turn this next over to Jeff freeze Nair to pick it up from the next slide forward.
One more Side slide please, Susan. Thank you, Mayor, members of council Jeff reasoner recreation and golf manager. I'm here to highlight four of the projects for the Community Services Department. first project is improvements at the Callahan house. If you look at the picture on that slide, we are at the bottom windows are made of luxan. And we're looking at replacing that because they're all fogged over and difficult to see. And then we're also going to replace our install storm windows. The second item that we are proposing is repair of the decorative lead window that you see At the top of that, of that picture, our issue is that the over time that shifting of the building is starting to push that window out and we want to make sure that that could be protected as a part of the historic house. The third item would be repaired to the driveway that has cracking and is breaking up and is becoming a safety issue.
next project is the firehouse Art Center facility improvements. As you're aware, this is a city owned facility on forth that the firehouse Arts Center uses. It's been a while since that any work has really been done on that facility. We are proposing two years of repairs with the first year being painting Replacement a painting of windows or replacement of windows and also some work on the gutters that is causing some interior damage, and then replacement of the basement stairs and handrail, a total of $60,600.
The next project is the museum entry concrete replacement. Anyone that has gone to the museum has noticed how the concrete is coming apart and is causing a safety issue. staff has tried to do a number of improvements to make that better but those improvements are failing also, and see in that picture on the right. Some of the temporary concrete debts have been put in there. Total of $101,000 for that project.
The next project is replacement of the concrete at the Roosevelt Pavilion. In 2017, the post tension cables started to fail and caused a large damage to some of the concrete. At that time, the engineering staff work to figure out how we could cut the cables in that concrete to prevent it from damaging more concrete and worse hurt possibly hurting someone. This project proposes that we spent $40,000 for design in 2021 and another 229,000 to do the actual concrete replacement. One of the challenges in this is that there are cables still in there that are required to To help hold up the pavilion itself, so, it will take some engineering to get that done right in without Pavilion. Next slide please. And with that, I will turn it over to Jim angstadt.
Good evening Mayor Bagley city council members jimang staff with public works and natural resources. Jim, hold on one second. Dr.
Waters. Did you have a question for Jim?
No, I had a question for Jeff. Okay, I'm trying to track as Jeff goes through his his presentation, the projects he referenced and I if I'm looking on them, if I were to use pages 1415 and 16 in the CIE budget. I see one of those reference, I think the Roosevelt Park improvement note.
Roosevelt put billion concrete replacement. But I don't see reference to the firehouse project or to the county. Where should I be looking, Jeff?
You know, I don't have that document, Jim golden. Can you help with that?
I would look on page 11 and 12. And at the bottom of page 11. is the is
the Callahan house improvements that you're asking about.
with Jim just so just shouldn't when I find these, if I kind of wanted to look at him in the context of the five year plan, wouldn't I see the same projects listed in 21? Yeah. 21 as funded, as I would see on pages 11 and 12. Here,
okay. Yeah, so it's on page 15.
In that display, it's on page 15 under public buildings and facilities.
Oh, I see. Okay. I was looking for Park under Parks and Rec. I see it. I got it. Okay, thanks. Got it.
So Mayor back lease and council members, Jim angstadt with public works and natural resources. Last two projects we wanted to cover under the municipal buildings pbf 119 is municipal buildings flooring replacement, bringing in a project budget of about $270,000 replacing flooring and carpeting for buildings. The industry standard for carpeting and flooring replacement is about 12 anywhere between 12 and 15 years. Two of these buildings fall within those, those numbers. Two of them are well beyond it. So it is time to replace those. Could you go to the next slide please? So early in 2020, city staff completed a building envelope energy audit report that recommended several improvements to building envelopes at the four buildings listed here to improve energy use, reduce greenhouse gases and support environmental stewardship. The project budget is about $200,000. We'll be undertaking that next year. Next slide.
So I'm going to turn it over.
Jim, before you go into that just sorry, council knows, when we were reviewing the issues in the public, in the public, when we're reviewing the public improvement fund and public buildings, just so council knows one of the things that I was looking at, and we really saw this when we got into the massive project of the Civic Center and what we're doing now in front of the libraries. And you see this in all of these is really a focus on maintenance. And as we've talked about with counsel before, before we look at some of the new things, we really need to make sure that what we already have in our existing inventory is well maintained, so that we can work to add life expectancy to it. And we can minimize the situation that we've gotten into with some of our other facilities. So just wanted you to know, what I was thinking about in terms of how we were moving through these projects. And then obviously, public buildings, efficiency improvements, ties to the work that they did when they were evaluating it, but also ties to the sustainability plan that Council passed. And then the work that we've done in conjunction with the Climate Action Task Force, so we thought we could bring those three things together.
Let's see another question.
Yeah, sorry. I don't mean to bog it down. I this is maybe for Jim, maybe for Harold. As I as I'm looking at, again, I'm on page 15, as I'm looking at that list of 2000 In 21, and then 225, and I see that in 20 in 2020, the Civic Center rehab library facilities condition assessments, and that combination of probably 13, maybe $12 million. That that's highlighted that way because that came from the bond question that was approved for the other projects, the firehouse upgrades in the golf course. maintenance facility. I don't know did I see that in like a Parks and Rec or in Westwood public safety or is the road I see the firehouse station improvements. We are creating a new one where we having one were that were those shown up in terms of the bond funding for those projects. Shoo in for like the golf the sprinkly the watering systems in the, in the in the in the maintenance facility that was all part of that project that bond
sent it later in the presentation, you should
know, but the question is Where are they on on slide on page 15? Let me check that out. Councilman waters, and I'll answer the question.
Yeah, whatever page.
Yeah, let's move on in the meantime, and I'll find that.
So with that, well,
the next part of our presentation involves Longmont power and communication. So I'm going to turn it over to David Hornbacher who's going to tell us how he's going to keep the lights on.
Thank you, Jim. And tonight's a little bit more challenging than then some nights with that wet heavy snow in the trees they'll leave out. Good evening Mayor Bagley and members of city council. I'm Dave Hornbacher, the Executive Director for Longmont power communications. I'm going to highlight just a few of our See IP programs here 2021 and beyond. So next slide, please.
So you can see what the 2021 overview,
it's approximately 11
point 2 million. There are multiple projects in there, there are two of more size one is the age construction for 4.1 million. And as council may recall, they've seen that annually. And what that is is the money that is attributed to the extension modification electric system to serve the development within the community. And likewise, we recover that money for those services. Also the advanced metering infrastructure at 6 million for 2021. And I'll cover that in greater detail in a future slide. Next slide please. So one of the one of the activities is the electric system up the ladder substation upgrades and 200,000 for this year and 415 or next coming years, it's basically has some additional technology on the system, some landscaping, and I'm very happy to say if you look at that bottom right photo, that is an aerial shot of our county line substation, and you'll notice two buildings and to the right of one building, there's a dark object there, that's transformer number one. And immediately south of that right now we're finishing up transformer number two, that will be online within this fall. So within the next 30 to 60 days, we'll actually have additional capacity at that substation. So we do need to finish up the landscaping, landscaping and gate. next photo place next, thank you, um, I group these together because realistically, these are a trio of projects that work together and they're very integral to part of our goal. Are this decades goal 100% renewable energy. So it's the reliability of the modernization of the grid. It's rehab and improvements. And it's distributed energy resources and distributed energy resources is a new capital line item. And that's covering a variety of specific subject topics. But that includes distributed generation, distributed energy storage, energy efficiency, demand response, and beneficial electrification. Those are sort of key components of distributed energy resources. You'll see it in slang as yours. And I'll go into that in a little bit more, but it's one of the keys to getting to our goal at the end of this decade. Next slide, please. And so advanced metering. So this is a multi year project council actually last year, approved the rate change To support this project, and so this project is one that we're looking to fund directly from the utility, we're not going out and seeking bonding or other resources for it, you can see that there's 7.5 million in 2021. Five years total is 13.5. And I think some of the some of the updates on the AMI project is we are in the process of hiring an ami project manager to lead this transition in our metering, as well as then the ramp out to that for use with our customers. We've also been reviewing other utility contracts specific to ami projects that have been done in the last year or two to make sure that we're well informed and we know our pricing. We've also worked on extensive functionality, and what I would anticipate is that the selection of the system will be done in 2020. And then installations will occur and 2021 and 2022 based on the final vendor, and the ability to integrate that into our community. And probably more specifically, we talked about
we noted that our current technology is basically one, one read of a meter a month by a person walking by
that that does not really support the needs of the future. And back when I mentioned the trio projects, it's between those trivial projects and am I they're sort of the basis of building essentially the utility of the future today. And it's one of the AMI is one of those enabling technologies help us get there. And, more specifically, it it creates this connection between energy use and energy generation. And that cannot occur with the current system. And then when customers can actually understand and start to manage their energy use, that gets us much closer to being able to start to match their energy use with the flexibility in the dynamics that you see with renewable energy. It also allows to integrate or support Smart Home functions. So as customers become even more enabled, and more interested in understanding, managing their energy on a very, you know, appliance by clients basis, it's something that can help support that also mentioned earlier, the ders that is triggering energy resources. And again, you have to have the data coming in so you know, to what degree and where energy is being generated, how it comes onto your system and how you can utilize it. Likewise, as we move into storage, you know, distributed energy storage again, how can you leverage that to Fill the the valleys where other resources are not available. Again, it supports energy efficiency, demand response and beneficial electrification.
have heard at the last several council meetings public invited to heard that there is an express concern with the radio frequency from ami meters. I think the key is is be assured that we take their concerns seriously. We listen. And while we're not the medical experts on this, we do refer and rely on the expertise of other agencies that we trust, such as the CDC, the FCC, as well as the Colorado Department of Public Health to help guide and inform us as we move forward with this project.
Next slide please.
Another one that we have in there is electric vehicle charging stations. We have several charging stations available out there to the public. We recently completed one at the library, we have another one out at the museum and serving sort of the museum and, and the facilities out there. And then also another one at the service center. We want to push further into electrical vehicle charging both for city vehicles as well as community vehicles. And that's what this funding is for is to provide more of those stations in the public eye and to really get good at this as we start to see more and more electrical vehicles become a substantial mode of transportation. On Next slide, please. And so with that, I will turn it over to Valerie Dodd.
Any questions on the electric Peace Council?
Yeah, I'm here. This is no surprise to you. I I've expressed myself to The Council on this. David, I appreciate your reference to the, to what we've heard from the public. I think there are two issues for me that we've heard one are the health issues. And I and the other is whether which which approach wired or wireless is more future oriented and has greater potential down the road. I know and I don't know enough about either of those topics, to have formed a meaningful conclusion for or set of observations or decisions. But if we're gonna if we're and I think we should continue with our smart metering system, no question about that. It's critical to achieving our hundred percent renewable energy by 2030 goal. But I but I for one, before I vote on a $13 million commitment would like more information, comparing the wireless and the Wired systems in terms of efficiency and functionality and costs Before we even talk about health issues, it as we go forward with this with this approach, not to question moving forward Am I was smart metering but but being clearer, at least for me, and maybe I just need a one on one tutorial that helps me understand the differences, cost benefits pluses and minuses on a wired versus a wireless approach.
certainly, Councilmember waters, I could work and schedule some time with you to go over that information and hopefully address your questions before you vote on this.
All right, is there is there a reason why we wouldn't want to invite in we've heard several references to somebody who is the author of this ama paper Dr. Shockley is a reason why we wouldn't want to bring his voice and expertise into this conversation.
So I think
I think it's important to get down to the basics of the systems and what they do what they don't do back to your, your question. And so with that, I think there are certainly a variety of experts out there that are in tune and can't answer those questions. But where I would first start is ensure that we've got the right information and current literature towards you versus trying to start bringing in others who have their own perspectives on these.
So you know, I've, I've read the I've read the report, I'm actually trying to skim through it. So there is a section. And so at least the one report that folks are referencing was published on the 26th of November in 2012. And so, some things that we have to let me kind of back up And some things that we have to really hit on this is a we have a goal of 2030 to go 100% renewable so so that becomes an anchor point in terms of being able to achieve it when we when you when you go in and and look at the report they talked about a number of things and I lost my page so I can't find it now, but
There we go.
So it's been some it's been some time on the health evidence and in there, I think they recognize that there's been different studies in different components or different studies in all coming to different conclusions. And one of the points was why would you invest in this if there is the chance for health issues? I think some some other pieces. And he says first of all smart meters have failed to deliver Smart Grid benefits for fundamentally technical reasons. networks do not generally provide full two way communications can customer usage display was in most cases stale data. On the third party website on site, real time displays not feasible using most meter backhaul networks and smart meters and their networks cannot are ill equipped to implement demand response load control strategies. I think what I can say is when we're talking about this, what we have to choose based on becoming 100% renewable is something that really can implement. And David if I miss speaking, you jump in but and implement demand response and load control strategies, because that really is a fundamental component of how you look at moving to that hundred percent renewable. We are looking at a network that is two way communication. Correct, David?
And so when when you start pulling all this together and then in the early part of that article, they talked about the fact that the infrastructure on the system isn't built for this. And so you see the other investments that we're putting in place in terms of that infrastructure in our truck, I call it the truck system, but in our system coming into it, that has to integrate with the AMI. So I think what we'll need to do is is really dig into this and and bring some of those points. And then if you go to the to the last section, when he talks about the health components, he does reference and then there's questions about who owns the data, how its communicated. And I think part of it is is when you go To move into this world, you really want that to lay communication with the residents so they can help you manage your loads, especially, as we've talked about when you enter that world you may have a glut of energy that you need to pull down on. And then when you look at this, so for example, California, in this article they passed and they said, wireless smart meters when installed properly maintained result in smaller levels of radio frequency exposure. References FCC standard scientific studies have not identified confirm negative health effects and not enough is currently known about potential non thermal impacts. And so, when you when you move through this he recognizes that there is a difference. In the point is, in the face of this the unavoidable question arises why invest in something with no potential for harm would impact people. That's the crux of the argument taking in a different scientific study. So what we can do is work and really bring those studies in a way similar to what we did in terms of the 5g provide that to Council.
Well, I appreciate that.
I want not to be a distraction or an annoyance, which I probably am already in this process. But on this particular topic with the with the commitment we're making and in the in the visibility of it, and the expense of it, I'd like to make certain that you've helped me get as clear on this as you have done on other than on the 5g issues with with the telecommunications industry and where we stand with the FCC, etc. Okay. That's the intent. I appreciate that.
All right. Let's continue.
Okay, I think it is my turn. So Good evening, Mayor Bagley and members of council. Valerie Dodd, the executive director of net Slight, I have one slide and one slide only. So if someone will please jump to it. I'll skip through that. And then I'm hoping to come back in the next few weeks so that I could provide a more thorough and broad overview of the operations. So I think there have been some questions about what's going on with Next slide. So in terms of the 21 capital budget, we have about $3.7 million plan to be spent that does represent about a 29% year over year increase. The good news is that's mostly made up of about $800,000 worth of one time expenses, and subsequent years, you won't see the capital budget nearly as high as it will be next year. If you look to the far right hand side, and you see that table, or excuse me, that pie chart, you'll see that really our capital expenses fall into three categories. One is fiber construction to make sure that we keep up with the new builds the community. The second is around reliability and capacity to make sure that we continue to have a superior product in the marketplace. And then lastly installations for customers mostly residential and some commercial. So if you look back to the left side the fiber construction which I spoke about being the largest piece of the pie, we have about $1.4 million plan there and that is really to enable about 2900 new premises, which are mostly Greenfield mdu builds are empty use multi dwelling family units, we also have about 48 small properties that we have still not gotten to that we want to finish out and that should complete our build of the Brownfield or existing properties. average cost for the build on those types of premises is about $484. Next we get into those one time reliability and capacity enhancement expenses that I referenced. We have about $600,000 in routers to enable 100 gig capacity for transport. The reason we need that is because this year we're growing our customer base by about 9% next year we will grow it by Another 6%. And since the first quarter of this year, we're seeing about a 15% increase in data consumption. So we've got to make sure we accommodate the growing customer base as well as a growing data consumption. The next is we're spending about $225,000. For a new fiber hut, we're beginning of phase seven, which is over on county line, that is to accommodate some growth that we have and some growth that we're expecting. So more to come about that but we're certainly making sure that we're future proofing that part of town. And then lastly, we have the installations and that is one of those success base expenses, meaning if the customers dept sign up for service, we don't incur that expense. So we still are planning to turn out about 3200 new customers next year that is gross. You have a thing called churn where your customer base does turn out at a clip of about 2% a month, which is really low for the industry, but we'll probably only net about 1400 customers next year. But we have to accommodate and spend the money to install about 3200. The weighted average cost for those installations is around $368. And that will decline over time as we eventually hope to get a drop and Ariel are very drawn to every single household in premise. And so it'll be really easy to activate those customers going forward. And many customers can do self installations themselves. And then lastly, we have the Boston Avenue Bridge project, not a bunch of money, but just wanted to make sure you all knew that we were aligned with the other departments in terms of growth and builds. So I will pause and see if there are any questions.
Nope, let's keep going.
Okay, Jeff cedar is up next, I believe Thank you.
Actually, I'll take this one. Good evening, Mayor Bagley and members of council. My name is Sheree Montgomery, and it's my pleasure to be joining me tonight as staff. I'm actually one of the new senior project managers in the facilities maintenance service division.
Next slide, please.
We've got four bond projects underway. Phase One of the Civic Center rehabilitation project was the stabilization of the finance parking garage and that work is complete. The garage was opened at the beginning of the year in phase two work includes improvements at the admin East structure, the admin East parking garage, which was recently opened and the library Plaza. I would have anticipated the library work would have been complete prior to the first snowfall. But given today's weather that definitely proved me wrong. We're still underway there. We do plan to continue renovations to include work at the library. Initial investigations have begun at the Safety and Justice Center, as well as the facility conditions assessment at the longest rec center.
Next slide please.
Recreation actually has five bond projects. Um first the you Creek Golf Course maintenance facility project has started, studio architecture has been selected as the project's architect. The planning development review process for the conditional use site plan application is underway. And we had our first virtual neighborhood meeting held July 8. of the Twin Peaks and sunset golf course irrigation system consultants election is anticipated to begin later this year. And unfortunately, the centennial pool renovation and the golf course irrigation, rehabilitation and replacement projects are currently on hold. At this time, I'd like to introduce another project manager In our facilities group, Carrie she can carry.
If we can go to the next slide please, Susan. Can Amir Bagley, members of council and
all the ones that I'm sorry, Carrie.
dark waters is your hand go up before your image disappeared off my computer. I only only
first of all say Sharif Nice to see you. I didn't know you were in this job. Well, you were in the materials to these projects. Where am I? Where should I be looking? Because I don't. I'm not finding them on my pages 1415 and 16. I'm guessing they're there. I'm just not seeing them.
And Jim was looking for that. Jim, did you find it?
yeah, actually. So Councilmember Ward is when you're looking at for 14 1516. If you notice the title of those pages are 21 through 25 capital improvement program funded projects. Yeah. The projects Shown here are Only those that are between 21 and 25. If they have a budget from a prior year in 20 or prior, that's what that 20 budget column is showing these projects that that we're going over now with the bond do not have new money budgeted between 21 and 25. A few of the bond projects do and so they are shown there. They have dollars scheduled in years four and five of the ccip. So I think that is why you're not seeing these golf projects there in the fire stations.
So so they're there there will be funded by by my but they're no they're not currently yet part of the five year CIE budget,
they're already in there. They were previously budgeted in a prior year. And they do not have any new money being budgeted from 21 through 25. So they're not included here. If I had to do money, then they would be here.
Thanks to you. And I just didn't see him in 2020 either. That's part of my problem.
But we're only showing 2020 because those projects have money from coming in during 21 through 25. Anything that's shown in 2020 has new money coming in after it sometime in 21 through 25.
All right, I can follow up individually with you if I have more questions. Thanks. Okay, you bet.
Okay, so I'm back down again Carrie Shan, Senior Project Manager facilities and maintenance services. I am working with Scott Assistant Chief Scott Snyder on the two fire station replacements. So of the approximate $9.3 million in bond funds, we've got $7.6 million allocated to the design build services at approximately 1.2 million went to station to land and pre development costs. The design build cost contract is expected to be signed in the next couple of weeks. And we plan on building both of the stations concurrently with construction scheduled to start at the end of q1 2021. Our anticipated completion of both stations in May of 2022. So that is all I have unless y'all have any questions. I will turn it over to Jim and Sam who's going to wrap up with pw nr again.
Thank you, Carrie.
So wrapping up the
rest of the presentation we want to go over some public works in natural resources projects. Next slide. We've broken them out into basically five main categories, starting with drainage. parks and open space and trails are sewer wastewater, transportation and water projects. Were bringing bringing to the table about $63 million worth of capital improvement projects for next year. Next slide please. First item here real quick is just to go over kind of the drainage project summary. This this fund in our storm drainage fund is a little bit challenged. We're really only programming in small capital contribution for one project, which is the resilient St. ferring project. We did provide a rather detailed update about a month ago for council so I really didn't want to go into this project too much. We will be bringing back an update later this month are into the fall, I should say excuse me regarding the storm drainage fund and providing a detailed update on the financial condition of the fund as well as the operational challenges we're currently facing. Next slide please. So shifting over to our parks, open space and trail projects. We have about four million dollars program not overnight projects. I'm going to go over two key projects we're looking at. First, I want to just provide a quick plug due to the parks in natural resources group. We were advised today by the American public works Association, the Colorado chapter that we were awarded a chapter award for the dickens park in the category of parks and trails, so quick shout out to our natural resources group.
Some of the projects that we'll be working on actually currently working on with some design this year into construction next year, is a The next section of the st brain Greenway. This was the east side of the city had now It includes an underpass at State Highway 119. The real kicker on this project is we did get some grant funding to the have about $1.5 million. So, good effort by again our natural resources group.
Next slide please.
falling under our asset management component in parks and natural resources is the park infrastructure rehabilitation replacement. We're focusing on Lou Miller Park next year. Having a number of improvements. And it is a renewal versus a complete rebuild is more found it's more cost effective to undertake renewal projects and rehabilitation projects versus complete rebuilds. I think we all can agree that one of the greatest assets we had during the COVID emergency was our parks a lot of use out of out of people we saw some challenges but people were really using them. Next slide please. shifted over to sewer bye Four and a half million under six projects. The key project I want to focus on tonight is our wastewater treatment plant reg 85 improvements. Next slide, please. So over the sewer plant, one of the challenges, and across the board for a lot of our areas that are regulated by the state is when they impose new state regulations. In this case a few years ago, they're issued requirements to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus in our effluent discharges. So we initiated a compliance schedule. We are currently on track with that schedule to undertake design next year with construction to follow. We are undertaking an alternative analysis to find what is the best way whether it's chemical treatment or biological. We've actually come up with a combination of both of those that will be Institute But part of one of our biggest investments The city has is our wastewater treatment plant. So we want to stay on the good side of the state and keep our permits.
Next slide please.
So on our transportation, we have some key projects that overlap into other areas. The we're bringing about $16 million in next year, over six projects. Can you run the next slide please? First one is our major asset management program. Street rehab program
covers the entire city.
We have a pretty strong program for knowing when, when and which roads we need to upgrade. The rehab includes could include asphalt overlays crack seal, Chip seal, some forms of preservation, some roads, we do have to do Complete roadway reconstruction. You see that over on ninth Avenue West of over currently where we were widening the road out slightly for bike lanes, but we did have to reconstruct it. There's too many failures on it. In conjunction with our street rehab, we also undertake concrete repair replacements. Part of our Ada transition plan to keep us in. Current with with newer standards. Next slide please. And I'm getting pictures in so you can see the bad paving that we replace TRP 11 our transportation system management. See IP covers a multitude of areas our safety multimodal and some minor capacity usually see it an intersection improvements include school safety improvements. We also bring our new signals out of this this project neighborhood Traffic mitigation. I wanted to highlight this traffic signal improvements at various intersections. We were able to obtain a grant from C dot Colorado Department of Transportation and HS IP grant. That is highway safety and Improvement Program grant that brought about $800,000 into the fund with only a 10% match so the city only had to come up with about 89,000 for a 900 $900,000 project. Next slide, please. Boston Avenue connection. This is tied in with our quiet zone project as we're trying to get a crossing over BNSF railroad tracks. This will also be one of the main routes for our BRT 119 BRT connection. We are currently working on conceptual design and property acquisition, running into final design in 2021.
Next slide please
praise us to real real quiet zones. We have been working on design as per direction from City Council. We were anticipating going to construction by the end of this year that has gotten pushed into next year in major part because we did receive an FR a grant which covers half the cost of the $8 million project. That grant agreement is currently being finalized. Part of that agreement included undertaking some environmental work along the crossings to verify that there were no issues. We will be bringing that grant agreement forward to Council in October but we are currently still working on finalizing design coordinating with BNSF and PC on the project.
So one of the projects that's tied pretty closely with our resilient St. vane project is the Boston Avenue Bridge or we're saying for a TRP 118. We have been working on design with construction in 2021. This widens out the extends the bridge out to carry the hundred year flows. So it will improve flood protection in the area. Provide bike and ped improvements on the bridge. This is the financial match for the Army Corps of Engineers project which is just upstream of this. So it is critical that we undertake this project so that we can get the next phase of the RSVP underway.
Next slide please.
So in closing out, we want to go over some of the water projects, which is probably the biggest investment we have $37 million Next year, kind of over 10 projects, I want to cover three key projects. So within our water supply system or water system, there are three main components supply, treatment and distribution. And each of these projects covers one of those elements. Next slide please. So under water supply, we are already working on our supply pipelines up around Lyons. We are proposing to construct a pump station that connects our North St. Ray pipeline in our south anchoring pipeline. Right additional redundancy and efficiencies. Critical item and this is that this is the last of the FEMA money we received for some of our water projects. So we want to use those dollars up before they expire at the end of next year. The other project that we'll be working on continuing to work on is the South St. berean pipeline rehab was damaged during the flood. We've repaired parts of it and now we're moving forward with the final areas to install some vaults clean out the pipe and line some of the pipe due to some of the damage received. Next slide. So, price Park tank replacement original open water storage reservoirs in the black and white photo on the right you can see kinda in the lower left corner of that photo shows the reservoirs. We are calling for replacement of the existing $7 million dollar or 7 million gallon tank and pump station. We are currently working on design construction is slated for next year and it's important to note that this is one of the funding for this project is supported via the bond election is coming up this November.
Next slide please And in closing out
wanted real quick give you an overview The Nelson Flanders water treatment plant expansion. That is also funding proposed through the bond election. Design we're doing a design build on it, it's currently designed is underway. This will replace this expansion will replace the capacity from the waste gas plant that we've had some challenges with meeting requirements and regulations on providing additional redundancy and resilience for the system. rather large project construction is slated for late next year through 2023. And with that, I'll slide into the last slide and open up for any questions.
All right, Doctor, let's go actually Casper.
If you'd raise your hand earlier, I apologize. The screens popping up the people who are spot speaking,
twice was talking about so I
apologize. Go ahead. Sorry.
Okay, I don't remember what it was about anyway.
So, Jim, when you first showed the picture of the Boston bridge, there was a little illustration of a little girl crossing this free Boston Avenue Bridge with a rubber red bridge that rolled out and then rolled back and then you could slap it back out. I thought that was kind of an interesting idea. That's obviously not what you're doing. I did want to ask you if this I'm part of the Boulder County consortium and the city the county is going to fund a bicycle lane all the way from I 25 into Longmont. I'm wondering if that's part of this, any of these projects or if you know about that is a really wonderful idea because once we It'll help our connectivity. People can take their buses, their bikes, various places and then bike from I 25 back into town.
I think that's that's it is not actually included in any of these projects. I think that's early in the planning stages. Okay. But we will certainly be be willing and partner with them for anything that's coming into town.
Yeah. It'll be a nice connection with everything that you guys have planned. Thank you.
Sorry about muted. Go ahead. Tim grant.
Thanks, Andrew. amusa wouldn't mind sharing more of my share more of my airtime share than I deserve. But Jim, just real quickly, the price of Park tank and the Nelson Flanders that's 30 million of the 80 million if we get approval in November, November.
I believe those are the numbers.
Yeah, that's a rough approximation of those two projects. I just Yeah, they're there. We've got there.
Other projects. There is some that that is part of the there is some funding available already that we're utilizing out of existing funds, but I would probably want to defer to, to Becky Doyle. on that. I think she was still on the call. So
yes, hi, sorry. Can you repeat the question?
Just Just to just to clarify that the $30 million for the part price tank, and then also Flanders, that's 30 million of what what we would hope to be able to, to you to spend an $80 million in from an $80 million water bond. There are a little
Marin Council, there are some components of both of those projects that are that are funded out. Have the fund balance in the water fund. So the components that would be funded as part of the bond are currently shown as unfunded. And so don't come into the totals that are in those projects there. So so there's both existing fund balance and, you know, future debt that's part of both of those projects.
All right. Thank you. How does it How does the debt break out for those projects?
Oh, we'd have to look at the unfunded components but we're looking at probably something near 435 million toward the plant and about 15 toward the price Park tank.
So these are just the first installments of that $80 million
with what we're seeing in the next year's pa tip budget.
Not exactly what you're seeing in next year's tip budget. are components that are not real that are funded outside of that $80 million.
So that's Oh, this is in addition to the project, ready to get started next year and would finish it with the 80 million. Got it. Okay, that's helpful. number one. Number two, Jim the the the $2 million for quiet zones that are budgeted for 2021. With what we budgeted this year, does that get us to the $4 million match we need to be able to spend the federal grant
I think I have that also. So we're we're splitting out the both the grant funding and the match funding over the next two years. So it's sort of a foreign for plan but we've incorporated both the revenue from the grant and then also fund balances our contribution.
But near to a 2 million next year, gets us to the 4 million match.
We got Don't we have to match the $4 million federal grant.
I think what we programmed in is
Counselor waters, we probably we have a million this year. We program 2 million in 2021. I believe we have another million programmed in the future. So we spread it out over several years. There is a million this year, 2 million next year. I think a million beyond that to get us to that that
gets us going. We've done enough. Yes, just to relate to two unrelated to the tip budget as it exists right now. One
if we have if we have intersections that meet warrants for traffic signals? And we have and we don't see anything in this budget that sets money aside for traffic for intersections that meet warrants? Is it is it fair to say that regardless of what the This budget looks like we would install traffic signals if intersections meet one of the nine warrants for a traffic signal. Now I'm thinking specifically about countyline. What road one in 17th Avenue, as we as we, as we, as I learned today from Dale, indeed, we're in the process of widening countyline Road one, which was on and then often, you know, obviously back in under underway right now. If that intersection meets warrants in 2021, will, will we be able will be the budget to install traffic.
Now, Mayor Bagley, Councilmember waters Let me try to answer at one. So the first criteria is that they have to meet warrants. The second is is that we have to have funding available to do it. And so I don't know that we're in a position right now to say that, we're going to be able to find additional intersections in 2021, that haven't been identified yet. The street fund is pretty heavily hit by by both the pandemic as well as some of the projects that we're trying to fund out there. So it takes both, it has to meet the criteria, and then we have to, I call it scrape up the dollars and we either get that by the way through grants, or we find enough dollars out of the street and sales tax fund to do that.
So I think the answer is no.
The answer is not necessarily. The answer is not it's not a given if it meets a warrant. It's not an absolute given that it will be built in any given year. It depends on funding also being available.
You know you do I have asked this question before and I get in trouble. For an answer, you know that?
I hope not for me, but maybe?
Well, I thought it was my understanding that once they met a warrant, whether we budgeted for it or not, we were going to we would install traffic signals, if we had intersections that met warrants. And since I didn't see anything in here, I don't know whether that intersection will meet warrants. But I, I'm concerned if we have intersections to do and we say to residents, well, it meets warrants, but simply we can't afford to give you traffic light.
Maybe the thing to do Councilmember waters like an AB the engineering group look to see, are there any intersections that are meeting more or anticipated to meet more? It's in 21 that we have not identified funding to do the signal light. Is that
fair? Yeah, that'd be fair. Thanks. Appreciate that. I'm done.
All right. Great. Wait, you shorter, I'm gonna hold you to it. You said
All right, just giving it just giving you crap. It's only 1030. We're good. All right. Anything else from you guys, Harold?
Yeah. Just to summarize, I just wanted to point out since we'll be going through this for the next few weeks, if counsel has any questions along the way that they want to send us in between the meetings, we'll follow up on them, work them into the council communication, work the answers zoom. And I will try to work in the answer a better answer, Tim, to your question about the bond projects. I know I can get it straight if I get it down and writing. And I'm also going to include a revised schedule for the Council for the next few meetings as well because we've already changed it quite a bit from what the original was with the budget message. We have time available to us in in future meetings here this month and early next month. And we don't want to overload any of the meetings with others. have other council business on them with budget items so we're going to be a little flexible and move things as as as we can to try to not overload the meetings. With that, I just want to apologize I thought Mr. angstadt was going to send you all some goodies to your house and the doorbell was gonna ring and you're gonna get some cookies or something but apparently he didn't come through so I wouldn't stay up late waiting for it.
So I got wait so I don't understand. So there might be cookies or there might not be could stay up and wait.
Alright, I'm back.
Alright, let's move on to council council comments. Anybody?
Good. Harold anything.
Eugene, how about you? He can hear snoring
no snoring here yet there. Good morning, Eugene.
Nice. Nice. You could join us. Pretty close. All right, then. Let's go ahead and have a motion if we could, john, let me commotion.
Here I move to adjourn.
I'll second that all. All in favor say aye.
Aye. Opposed All right. Have a good night guys. See you later and Harold all come in and sign stuff tomorrow have Michelle dropping off for
It is actually
me happy birthday.
Happy birthday Harold's
lucky we adjourned right seem to but that's