LCC 8252020 - 25 August 2020 - 07-29-50 PM
9:17PM Aug 26, 2020
Order Can we please start with a roll call? You bet.
Councilmember Christiansen here. Councilmember Duggal fairing here. Councilmember Marty. Here. Councilmember Peck. Here. Member Rodriguez here. And Councilmember waters here. Mayor, you have a quorum.
All right. Let's go ahead and sit pledge. Marsha, do you want to lead us please? No, but I will. Thank you.
I pledge allegiance
to the republic for which it
stands, one nation,
with liberty and justice
All right. Thank you, Councilmember Warren. All right, just a quick reminder by the chair anyone wishing to vote Public comment during the first call public invited to be heard. That's item seven. We will also in item under item nine, the public hearing session session sections for ordinances to be read and adopted on second reading. Must Watch the livestream of the meeting for instructions. You'll see I'm currently on the screen in front of you right now. When the call information is displayed on the screen like you're seeing, please call the number displayed under the message ID. And when ask your participant Id just kind of press the pound key. And then you'll hear a confirmation and then you'll be told how many people are in there how long the line is, and then you'll be called into the room based on the last three or four numbers of your of your phone number. So and then when you get in there, go ahead and state your name and your address for the record and you will have three minutes. And unfortunately as we all know, no matter how awesome your comments, I'll need to cut you off at three minutes. All right, Do I have a motion for section for approval of minutes Do I have a motion to approve the August 11 20 20 regular session minutes.
all right It's been moved and seconded. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay.
All right. And then by the way, I'm not I usually don't ask for debate because I can see everybody if I miss somebody just wave. stronger. All right. Number five. Any agenda revisions, Harold. No, correct. haven't gotten anything. All right. motions, direct city manager data agenda items for future agendas. Anybody? All right, great. Let's go ahead and move on to Harold your COVID-19 update. I'm sorry, Paulie. Did you wave your hand?
Yes. All right. Councilmember Christiansen. Okay.
Tonight we had an executive session called by the mayor which was a very good and fruitful discussion. However, we also received a letter from the mayor this Week
in which he
gave us seven presentations that he wants and he wants them to take precedence over anything else that city council has said before or in the future. And I object to that. And I think this is an issue that we need to discuss the form of governance chosen by the voters of Longmont most the council manager system. This has worked well for a long month for decades, and we should uphold this form of governance and its principles. The guiding principle of city council is that city council as a body sets policy, and hires the city manager, the city attorney and the municipal judge. These three administrators implement and run their departments without council interference. In addition, we've given the city manager emergency powers during this time of pandemic more than ever, it's important to respect his time and his duties. One of which is to set the agenda and to determine how many additional reports the staff can handle. Council may by majority vote, augment or modify the agenda. The mayor by council Rules of Procedure not city charter may also augment or modify the agenda. In the council manager system of governance. The mayor has no veto power and must act with the consent of council to assert that the mayor may add seven reports and discussions that have not been publicly discussed or approved, and that they must take priority over anything Council has previously or in the future discussed and approved by majority vote constitutes a veto of counsel.
And in undermines both public discussion and the ability of council to act as a body.
I would move that we clarify this in the council Rules of Procedure to
Have a future discussion about that.
All right, the second, the motion is out of order. It was two parts to want to go ahead and restate your motion polling.
Okay. All right. So currently
right now switch rules. The Rules of Procedure are we were accepting motions direct the city manager to add agenda items to future agendas. Would you like to post something or propose a motion to put something on a future agenda item? not currently for discussion?
Yes, I would like to for the future as soon as possible to add to the agenda that we discussed. The council rules and procedure.
Perfect. Do we have a second
All right. The motion has been moved and seconded. It's now open for debate Casper Martin.
I think that the system the template for city government that is cited is not stated anywhere in the city charter or the council Rules of Procedure, which do say that actually the mayor is second in line for putting things on the agenda. And the council is third in line for putting things on the agenda. We haven't had any trouble with that in the past and I don't understand what the purpose is in amending the rules now.
I guess I guess the I guess, I guess I'll weigh in the I've been on city council now for almost nine years. I was mayor for two to two years. Hold on one second. Give me 30 seconds. I'm going to put the dog in the room because this
All right, sorry about that Marsha. My people didn't like what she had to say. Sorry about that. No, the so what I was gonna say is I was so I've been on city council now for nine years, three of which was mayor. And I would this is a rhetorical question. I would like anyone to mention at any time when I have ever thwarted through my city council or Mayor or mayoral position, any any direction that I didn't agree with on this council I have been nothing but patients Understanding that my view isn't the right one. Always I listen my view my job as mayor is to listen to the four people on Council and their direction My job is to help facilitate good law. That is how I have acted as mayor. Even when I didn't agree with it. This is the first time even though the the city council in the city charter and the city policies and procedures state that I have the authority and power to do so this is the first time that I have exercised that power ever and, and everybody here knows me well enough to know that I usually do things to prove a point. The point I'm making here is that a couple of them one I don't fight politically with my I mean I don't want to fight politically with my council members. Um, but At the same time, I do not want to get distracted and bogged down by personalities. And so right now the seven things that I listed on that agenda are things that are currently important to the city. Things that Harold has mentioned things that Eugene has mentioned things that city staff has mentioned, and I have been quiet. And I have waited for city council and I've let city council do whatever they want it for the last nine months in the second term as mayor. And so all I'm doing is exercising what what the what I am allowed to do. I believe nothing is inappropriate. I can augment and change that agenda. And people might not like it. But the solution is either change the charter or run somebody against me in 18 months should I choose to run again. But I have that power and authority. And oftentimes, the city council will say things stating well the mayor can't i can't and so on In this particular case, I'm not forwarding or vetoing anything anyone has done. It's just that there are things that we need to address that need to get addressed. And so that's it. I didn't give Harold the timeline. I didn't say do this right now. These are just things we need to get to. And a lot of times we don't have an opportunity to get the things and we're here at 11 o'clock and we still aren't getting to the things that I believe city staff thinks we need to get to. So that is the reason why I stated it. Councilmember Christiansen
they're basically this is not an attack on you personally, this is upholding the principle of the fact that the mayor is under this form of government that we received information in our orientation packet. And information is available on the council and manager system all over about 50 percent of the communities in the United States use it. And the rules are very clear that mayor has no veto power that the mayor has acts as a body with consent of council. I don't object to any of these. I don't object to most of the things that you put on that list. I just want to public discussion and a public vote on it. That's all because that is the principle of the kind of government that this the residents of this town voted for decades ago, which is Council and manager system, not the mayor and council system is nothing. All I'm asking for.
does not grant you that authority. It's the rules of procedure that grant you that authority to amend and amend and it does not give priority as Councilwoman Martin stated that the That, that the city manager has first priority, the mayor has the second priority and the council has the third priority. It simply says that any that the city manager sets the agenda, and the mayor or city council can amend it. However, my objection is that we need to amend it with the public discussion. That's all and a public vote.
And I and I agree, I guess what I'm saying is that the, I guess all I'm saying is I'm going to vote against it again, only because name one time, I did pull Metro districts from the agenda. There were council members that wanted me to, but I could have, but but my point is, I'm not, I'm not abusing my power. I'm only doing currently what I am permitted to do by law. As the chair of the meeting, I have never ever silenced any of what some might view as my political adversaries. I've always been quite open Making sure everybody gets stated what they have to say, even when it might be to my detriment. And so in this particular case, people can vote to tell me not to do a certain thing. But I will I am, I can do what I want. Um, as far as the charter and the city, rule city council rules and procedures allow me to, so we can have a discussion, we can have boats, but um, I will continue to exercise and it's not just me. At some point, maybe somebody on this council will be mayor, let's suppose Aaron Rodriguez runs next term. And he's the mayor now. It's not just me. It's going to be whoever's next. So Councilmember waters.
Yeah, I just just to clarify the motion. emotion is to review the council Rules of Procedure with the intent that we would modify them potentially.
The I'm sorry, do I have to I have permission to answer Mayor Bagley
Okay, thank you.
The intent is to clarify
what modification and augment mean, in the council rules and procedure. That's where we are given all of us given the authority to augment and modify the agenda. So, and I think it NEEDS CLARIFICATION because it isn't, it's, it's vague, and that's often a very good idea, but not an escape.
For whatever it's worth having. Having gone back and reviewed the charter and rule reviewed the rules procedure, and item number seven or roll procedure number rule number seven, I guess, in terms of agenda preparation, I think what Councilmember Martin come in, and I think that's the way it's spelled out, I think it's pretty clear the order in terms of who has sway or authority over you know, under the current rules, so um, if the intent is to try To change the rules, that's one thing if it's, if it's to clarify, I think it personally, I think it's good if it's pretty clear right now. I can like it or not like it. But but it is. I'm going to vote against the motion just because I don't think they need clarification. I think they're clear
if that's the intent of the motion was verbeck.
Thank you very badly. I think, what the way I understand it is that we have in our agenda, a place where we direct staff to add things to the future agendas. And that wasn't done. We were just sent a list of things. Therefore it wasn't transparent in the meeting that anyone wanted to change the agenda or to redirect staff. And that that is where my confusion is, is that if we have a place in the agenda, to say let's direct staff to take This item off the agenda and add this because it's of more importance, or and then we get to vote on that. I think as far as the rules of procedure as far as our agenda went, that's what I think should happen instead of just getting an email saying, even though you all voted on this, to put it on the agenda, I'm going to say we're not going to do that. So, um, if we are going to continue with this, I want to know what we're taking off the agenda that we've already by majority
put on so No, no point Have I ever instructed city staff to take anything off the agenda that city council has said to put on the agenda. I could argue that I'm allowed to augment it, you guys can make a vote all you want. I can turn around and augment take off and adjust. I don't do that. Legally, I could but I do not do that. The other thing is that when I have a conversation with Harold before COVID it was a weekly thing where always talking the mayor in the city, the city manager are always talking is the chair of this meeting. We're trying to find a way to make sure we're not here all day and night and week. We are always putting things on the agenda and off the agenda. And so it's not about and the only reason why we do this is because there's a Robert according to again, council rules and procedures, it is not permitted in Mayor council comments to raise something and have raised emotion and have a vote on it. So we put it at the beginning of the meeting, so that it wasn't a surprise. It is not common practice for this council to to dictate the agendas by majority. You can augment you can change you can direct but it did that that's not it. city manager does that and then I augment the mayor augments or adjusts and then and so on and so on. Again, I just pointing out again, I have never ever, ever abused that authority. Councillor Martin.
Thank you Mayor Bagley. I just think that it's a very I mean, the the thing that made the email that the mayor send out didn't have anything to do with the agenda. He was asking for our feedback on the individual items in the email. However, I think it's a bad precedent to say that the council has to vote on the mayor's agenda additions
the language in the Rules of Procedure now, I mean, when we then decide that the council gets to vote on everything the city manager puts on the agenda to
we can ask the
we can ask the city clerk to read us that paragraph in the in the rules and procedures, but I would rather we didn't do that unless we get four votes to consider this.
You also have your one, I did not have to send that email. Nowhere does it say that I need to tell you guys what I direct the city manager to do, ever is the mayor I can augment period full stop. Um, and so I didn't have to tell any of you anything. I did it out of respect and transparency. And those are things that I believe that we need to address. So I don't get a veto. But as mayor in my position, I am allowed to put things on the agenda that I feel are important. And I do believe that most people would agree on this council that those seven things are important. And so I instructed Harold to get them on the agenda as soon as possible. And if there's something that Harold feels that we need to address before that, like I said, our phone lines are open and I'm sure that he will let me know. He has even said Brian don't take that off for Brian. Don't do that. We really need man are here, and I listen. And I also listen to my council members. So there's a motion on the floor. I don't see any other hands up. Let's go ahead and vote. The motion is to have a future discussion about council rules and procedures pertaining to the setting of agendas and augmenting the agendas. All in favor say aye.
Aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Nay Nay. All right. I didn't say Susie, how did you vote? I'm sorry.
I'm sorry. I said nay. Because at this time, we have a lot going on.
All right. So to get the the motion fails, five to two with councilmembers, Christiansen and peck Against All right. Thank you. Is there anything else that we'd like to do to direct the city manager to put on a future agenda?
All right, seeing nothing. Let's go ahead, Harold. Now you can do your COVID-19 update.
So I'm going to show you a couple slides real quick just to continue keeping consistent data coming forward, I'm not going to do as many as I normally do. Which screen are you seeing?
The cases by colorado.gov. Okay.
So I'm Susan, if you don't see it tell me because they changed our website. And so now I have to go into different tabs. So this information in terms of where we are at the state level, you can see this peak that you were seeing earlier. The good news is we tend to be on that downward trend. If you go to the state website with cdphp. One of the things I will say they just changed it. And so instead of having it on one page where you can see all the graphs, you'll need to move through it and click on different screen so it looks like this. So if you want the case summary, you have to pick this one and you can move through and get more information. It also gets gives you the counts, and you can dig into it in a different way. The other thing that I wanted to show you and this is what you keep hearing people talk about in terms of the percent positive on the PCR. So you can see at this point, once they were really generating a lot of tests for the state is 5.43. Today are the most recent number, it's a 2.94. So again, when you look at the number of tests they're doing and where they're seeing on the PCR, that's that's some good information. For us to continue watching in terms of Boulder County, their website is continued to be pretty consistent, which is a good thing as you as you're trying to track and watch the number. So this is a number of Boulder County residents that have been positive by date. Again, you can see that peak down at a couple of peaks, but then trended down pretty quickly. The thing that's really important so the overall PCR test, again, overall means from the beginning it's at 4.28% because Current five day average is at 2.1%. Actually, one point late last week, he got a little below 2%. This is the rolling average of positive PCR test when you see that over time, so you're seeing some consistency. This is when it dipped below 2%. Again, this is really just to continue showing council how many tests they're actually able to perform. I know there were questions about this, and you can see that there have been days that they've hit 700. What's good is on those days, a number of positives is still being lowered. It was when they were doing less than 500 tests.
Here's a graph that
sure I can find it for you all.
Nice website just went wonky on me.
Again, 20 to 29 year olds continue to be
the highest number of cases that we have in Boulder. County. This is a graph I wanted to sell you. So this is the five day average. And so you see this big peak here, and then we dropped and then we were just moving up and down. And it was but it was still trending upwards. We had another drop. And I think, you know, again, what's positive is that you see this, you know, we went back up, but then we turned it down. Again, I think the thing that everybody's really watching in terms of the case loads, and this is when you look at what we have in Longmont versus boulder at 846 is really what's going to happen in terms of
what's going to happen in terms of the college students coming back. I know that's been a significant topic of conversation in the GES and in Rikers updates that she provides me on Tuesday and Thursday and if you've seen the the some of the news stories, again, there was one last night about the number of parties and people we're interacting. So something everyone's watching, when you look at the hospital numbers, again, everything seems to be in pretty good shape. The ICU number, when you when you bring it out is in yellow, which is good based on what they're having. This is a number that continues to be in red. But again, it's med search beds, and that's based on elective procedures still being performed. So what I wanted to say to Council is everyone's still really watching the numbers and what that's going to look like. The one thing I did want to talk to council about today. I did send you all an email to the council regarding some information that I received from Jeff Zack, and in really in what he said in in that email is that based on where they are right now, and what they're looking at, they're still strongly recommending that city council stay in the city council board meetings stay in virtual format based on case loads, Part A lot of part of that, if you remember from the email was really talking about the fact that we're heading into fall, we're heading into flu season. Currently, right now, they're also monitoring West Nile. So there's a lot of things in play that they're looking at. And so his recommendation at this point is that we continue to stay remotely for both city council and board meetings unless there's something that comes up where we just can't accomplish that in its current structure. And then they're continuing to watch what that looks like in terms of how we move into protect our neighbor. The last update that I saw, I just got one earlier today, and I haven't seen it from from Jeff, but I think we were we had met four of the criteria and we had passed and we were almost meeting another four. So we haven't met all of the criteria in terms of moving into protect our neighbor. So that's probably the big news that we have at this point. If there's any questions, generally About COVID and where we are and what we're trying to do. I'll be happy to answer this question to save you some time.
Anybody custom every level fairing?
Oh, yeah, I have. So with the protect our neighbor, can is is it the counties can open to that level? Or does it have to be statewide
counties or regions can open can can can make the move into protect our neighbor. But there's a bug the county can't do it unilaterally. The county has to get emergency managers, cities so I would be involved in that conversation. So everyone has to come together and agree that you can move into protect our neighbor. The other option that they can look at is you could do it by region. So theoretically, Larimer boulder could go together and do a regional opening. If everyone met The criteria, there's a lot of people that have to sign off on it, public health directors, so on and so forth.
Okay, so then in the case for us, Longmont and St. vrain, because we have a portion of our region that is in weld County, would that how would that impact moving forward in that regard?
So slightly different question, because so what would happen is we would really be concerned with what's happening within the Boulder County area. And so for the schools that that would fall in weld County, that would have to be a different Converse station with weld County. And the school would then have to, I guess, make a decision, do they go with this in this area, and then in this in this area, or do they stay with the most strict? And I think, you know, there are some of the things that Jeff talked about that was actually occurring, where they're saying we're going to stay in this arena with the most strict guidelines It is it's it's not by it is not by
candle district boundaries. It's county boundaries,
only boundaries and not even city boundaries.
Right. Okay. And
so just so you know, I just pulled up that. So out of nine total protector neighbor metrics. We have six Matt in three parsley Net Promoter county
And in nine total. Thanks that was it.
All right. Anybody else? Look at Harold, what else do you have for us?
So just based on what we have and the information from Jeff, I'm going to continue as counsel as we all talked about early on in this listening to the public health director and taking that directive in terms of meetings, and then we'll be communicating with you all in terms of the recommendations that we're receiving from the public health director. If that's okay, we'll just continue down. This is Oregon. I
think you're keeping our city safe.
Anybody else from your staff? Are we good today? We're good. Great. Let's move on to special reports and presentations. proclamation doesn't you know what I just realized? Hold on, medication alarms going off. I just realized I don't know how to copy that proclamation to read the Could I get that sent to me real quick?
Give me just one moment there.
Great. Thank you.
Yeah, let's go ahead. Sorry.
Are you are if you're looking at that in that live meeting, there is a there's a download if they've got that open.
I don't it's shot locked up on me.
Let's go ahead and do first couple look invited be heard first, and then if you can go ahead and mail that to me. We'll Pick up that when we're when we're done with first call
me right, just send it if you want to go ahead and go for that, go for the proclamation up to you. Second. That's right.
All right, still not coming in, let's do first call, and then we'll go ahead and deal with that after. And I'm sure it's just my, my email system or my my internet. So let's go ahead and do first call and then we'll return to this. So let's go ahead and take a brief break. Let's take three minutes and then come back when everybody's in the room. All right.
For the caller that we just led into this meeting, we're taking a short break for public invited to be heard and then we will take the callers in the order that they show up. Thanks
Are you here
Get back online first called public invited to be heard and then we'll have got proclamation shouldn't take too long.
Mayor if you wouldn't mind holding for just another 30 seconds to a minute on that. We were a little bit late in unlocking as we put that first slide up so I think a couple council members have gotten a message Hey, it's locked, it's now unlocked so people should call in
All right, we're ready to go cuz very logical very.
Yeah, I received a text that there were about three people who were trying to call in and they got kicked out and now they're trying to call back, but they need the slide for the number and ID and all that.
Let's go ahead and throw that up until two or three minutes.
Please Yeah, thank you. I appreciate it.
Mary I'm going to stop sharing my slide and then we'll wait another 30 seconds for it to disappear from the livestream
And looks like we've got over 10. So it will take a few minutes to get through all of them.
For the callers that we've just Welcome to the meeting, you will be called upon by the last three digits of your phone number. I will unmute you and ask you to speak, say your name and state your address before you speak. And you will have three minutes. Alright, it looks like the slide has left the livestream. I'm ready to begin when you are there.
It's good to start.
The first caller?
How many? How many are in the queue? I'm sorry.
1-234-567-8910 1112 13.
All right. I just want us to know what to look forward to. Let's go
okay. The first caller I'm going to ask to unmute is 120 your phone number ends in 120. Can you unmute yourself please and state your name and address?
caller 120 Can you please unmute yourself? There you go. Can you hear us? Okay?
Yes, I can hear you guys. Can you hear me? Obviously we can.
Yes, please make sure you're you've muted the live stream. I think that's what the delay is.
Yes, I have done that. Okay, awesome. So my name is Rebecca Fenton and I live at 535 year wood drive in Longmont, Colorado.
You may begin Oh, and then
thank you so much. So I am part of a group called the Boulder County leftists and we have a few demands talking about equity in our schools. So I am a teacher. And yeah,
apologize. So one of the things that we'd like to demand is having our sorrows no longer be a part of the school communities. Another thing that we would like is for accurate portrayals of history to be shown in history books.
And, yeah, those are those are the top two right now.
All right, thanks.
Okay. Okay. All right. I found this Can I Can I finish two more?
time. Okay, thank you so much. So we'd also like to swiftly Institute occupational training to mitigate the effects of socio economic steadies to which bi p OC, which are black and indigenous people of color, and their communities are most susceptible. And finally, we'd like to institute with haste programs to teach critical life skills such as financial literacy, mindfulness and courageous conversations about race.
That is all.
Thank you very much. Okay, next caller.
next caller your phone number ends in 466466. Can you please unmute yourself?
color that ends in 466.
Can you hear me okay?
We sure can go ahead and stop listening to the live stream because We will be able to hear ourselves delayed in your your audio yeah Hi.
Okay, this is cute at Blackburn I live at 3724 Oakwood drive in Longmont. Good evening council members to Mayor Bailey obey great I am one person with two topics and three minutes so I'll get right to it. first topic has to do with PRP a and
plan I RP they call it integrated plan for moving into the future I'm having trouble hearing myself because I
know I've been able to turn off
Turkey Turkey I can you turn off the livestream.
I'm sorry, I don't know how to use it. So I'm gonna try and hide it. Anyway, I'm concerned about PRP ay ay ay RP or integrated plan moving forward that the four choices we were given on March 4, for a public hearing, feedback did not seem to offer any chance for feedback except to rank the choices, all of which were flawed. It seemed to me in one way or another. So, if I'm understanding, right, the only way to make public feedback to, to the Board of Directors is in fact to go to one of their official virtual meetings, which is going to be hard to do since they're up in Fort Collins and I noticed that there choices also included building a new fossil fuel powered electrical facility, which seems to be not in keeping with our hundred percent renewable goal. So I'm hoping that Mayor Bay Bagley that you can, in one of the board meetings, call their attention to the fact that there's some factual things wrong with the four plants they came up with. My second topic has to do with that with helmig contract and my hope that you will renew it, and perhaps even add a feature on it, where the some kind of alert might go out on a days when the pollution is bad enough to be dangerous people with for people with compromised breathing issues. I imagine you'll be hearing some more About this tonight and in the near future. So I'm hoping that what I'm saying will be repeated several times, and that you're indeed going to vote to continue his contract. It seems to me very important, these two things having to do with facing the climate change and crisis that we find ourselves. And so let me just say that I'm very grateful for the work you guys have done both before and during this pandemic. I really appreciate all the things you're involved in and trying to make better for us. So thank you, and thank you for your attention.
Thank you is like we're in All right, next caller.
Our next caller, your phone number ends in 593593. ask you to unmute.
There you are. Do you hear us? Hello?
Hello, hear me? We sure can you may begin.
Okay, good evening Mayor Begley in Longmont City Council. My name is Beth Anderson and I live at 421 j Street. I'm calling in reference to the issue of investment properties being used as short term rentals in Longmont. I am one of the 12 permitted residents who own one investment property that they are renting for short term stays. I've listened to the complaint calls put into council by residents who live in two houses on spruce street about a permitted short term rental that shares an adjacent backyard with them. If you consider the topographical layout of these homes, the houses are on a steep hill because because of the rise in elevation, environmental pollution travels across the fence more easily and the Arapaho occupants can See into the backyard of the spruce street homes. That Hill was there when they purchased the property and it's not going away. It seems that perhaps, these isolated complaints are rooted in the regretful consequence of purchasing a property on a steep hill. Because whether there are long or short term renters or owner occupants, the possibility of smoke and noise does not go away. Simply because you change the ordinance. unsavory long term renters in your neighborhood can be a much larger problem than short, short term renters, who will leave after a few days. Sound governmental policy is not based on or changed haphazardly because of isolated complaints. There is no current local data to suggest that the ordinance should be changed in the proposed fashion. In fact, your planning staff the experts that you hire to advise you recommend Expanding the ordinance in July instead it was going pretty well. Here are some stats based on the open records request I pulled since the inception of this ordinance 18 months ago of these 12 legal permit investment SDRs there has been only one code violation, and there have been only seven police calls. A mere 18 months ago you told us investment owners to move forward with starting our businesses as stewards of the city. We did so investing time and money to make our properties places that welcome guests and encourage tourism and spending in Longmont. We pay sales tax, we pay lodging tax. We follow the rules and we are good neighbors. Please consider actually enforcing the current code and allowing the third party vendor you have hired to complete their work and monitor compliance beep up to code with fines hearings and revocation faced Number of violations if necessary. But please do not put 12 Longmont residents out of business in these trying times because of isolated complaints.
Thank you. Thank you.
All right, next caller.
Our next caller, your phone number ends in 695695. I'm going to ask you to unmute
caller 695 There you are. Yeah. Hello.
Thank you very much. So Robert Cutler 1830 Lombard Street, in Longmont. Good evening, and thank you for letting me speak to you this evening. I have lived in the Longmont zip code for the past 11 years, and I've worked in the finance and investment field for over 40 years. I want to thank all of you For your work, and in particular, your commitment to a healthy lawn month it is carbon free and powered by renewable energy. I'm very excited that Obama has committed to 100% renewable by 2030. Today I want to talk to you about the puter River Power Authority trpa. In order to make sure that mama meets its commitment, I'm being 100% renewable. As I expect, you are well aware trpa has recently completed its integrated resource plan. In order to plan for the next several decades, there have been enough changes that are ready to add the four scenarios have been deemed not applicable. This leads to one scenario which involves a new natural gas fossil fuel plan. And the second scenario that I and others believe includes the unrealistic pricing and assumptions for renewable energy that makes it look attractive. I think it would be incredibly unfortunate and prohibit Longmont from reaching its 100% goal. If we Invest in a new natural gas fossil fuel plant at this point. If this plant is built, we are either committed to a natural gas fossil fuel plant for decades, or it is superseded by renewables that sits idle, having wasted significant dollars. I believe that renewable pricing and battery storage prices are coming down dramatically every year. I for one would be comfortable with even 90 to 95% renewable by 2030. Releasing the last portion is hard to obtain. For these reasons, I want to lobby in particular Mayor Bagley thank you and Mr. David Hornbacher, but really all of you to speak up strongly for pure EPA to run a new integrated resource plan. With our new current information and output. I realized that this is some work, but spending some money now say significant dollars in the future. Thank you very much for letting me speak and supportive woman Nursing are excellent, excellent commitment of 90 to 100%. Renewable by 2030. Thank you very much.
Thank you, sir. Okay, next caller.
next caller your phone number ends in 876. I'm going to ask you to unmute 876 Do you hear us?
hello. Hello. Can you hear me okay?
We sure can you may begin.
Great. My name is Jeremy no mere 524 flicker Avenue. And I too, am a mender member within the Boulder County collective and wanted to also communicate some demands, because that's the world we live in. They're called demands, although we're not as strong with them, but we do want to see them happen. So thank you with that. So overall study, we want a study that's commissioned by the city and paid for by the city that addresses race, gender, sexual orientation equity within Longmont. And we want to focus around the areas of public safety, urban development, education, well being, as well as economics and access to the arts, unless and more importantly, our environment. So what we've noticed of late is a lot of people are doing some great communication, great talking, but we actually want to see the action, and we need help with it. And we need that help that we've seen some other cities take on even within Colorado, from you guys. The second aspect is we'd like to see a downtown center for our youth that has a houses an advisory board, innovation and therapy rooms, Innovation Center type therapy rooms, maybe even some small event space, a small business type thing to help people transition more into it. Innovative feel, let third direction or support on starting our own nonprofit. And I actually think that's probably a gimme for this group, as it's probably a phone call or two with some resources in this town, on how we can start a nonprofit that really serves a larger community. And by that, I mean, all races, all ethnicities, all the nature of sexual orientation, because that's just something that we don't have right now. And it's really excluded for some members of our community. And then we also want to throw in some disabilities as well. So really just making a place that truly is inclusive for marginalized communities as a whole is that is a way that youth will get things not so segregated as we have in the past. And lastly, diverse in diversity and inclusion committee within the city. That is to support all the other organism out there that has some staying power and more importantly some responsibility and is also truly inclusive. We'd like that led by you. And very much at the forefront, people of color. And women are kind of overseeing that. And then lastly for you guys, an oversight board, and I think that some other people will speak to some other aspects, but that's all I have to say. And I appreciate you listening to my quote unquote demands.
Our next caller, your phone number ends in 932932. I'm going to ask you to unmute.
Hello, can you hear no,
We sure can. You may begin.
My name is Carolyn towers on at 1534 South Kauffman Street. Good evening Mayor Bagley council members I am here to again express concern regarding the traffic signal being excel at the corner of South Kauffman street like road. The installation of this traffic signal is disregarding a number of local, state and federal guidelines, declaring many exceptions to the code. In addition to during the planning of pike road improvement project, the city staff has not taken into account its own standards for guidelines with regard to noise reduction measures. As I'm revealing old council meeting notes and videos, council members throughout the year have stated that when this road is developed, consideration will need to be taken into account to protect the characteristics of the adjacent neighborhoods and the safety of the current residence for these current residents. Some of these meetings were discussing this topic while pike road was still a dirt road. Rainbow ridge and Creekside were very new and prospect was not yet developed. The current residents they were referring to were those that live along the north side of the road. People who have lived here For over 45 years, were told when they moved in that no more development could be placed to the south of our neighborhoods. The residents in older neighborhoods in town, although maybe not as affluent are what built the city, people that worked at the turkey plant built the homes and the street and the roads, etc. When we moved in main street with all pawn shops and bars, there were very few restaurants and retail was nearly non existent. We moved here before Longmont was quote unquote cool, but the city has been our home. We built our family here. This is where we are sorry. This is where we raised our children and would like to see our grandchildren raise as well. A lot has changed in Longmont some good, some not so good. But you as the City Council have a responsibility to the people of the city who have stuck with it throughout the years to retain the characteristics of the neighborhoods they embody. while developing pipe roads all residents may be thought of putting traffic signal at the intersection of a local residential street and then changing the street designation because, oh yeah, we don't actually do that is not in the vein of protecting and serving these residents. The standards, clothes and guidelines are in place for a reason. traffic volumes should be at least 1100 vehicles per day for the designation to change to a collector Street. We have not been able to work with the city for traffic mitigation because it cannot reach the 750 vehicles requires. So why is our street now on the collector street medication prioritization list? This is one of the questions that I am still waiting to get answers on as the city staff has stopped responding to me. Thank you for your time and for listening to me. I hope you all have a wonderful evening. Good night.
Thank you very much. I do want to reiterate that her comments imply that Longmont is no Awesome.
All right, next caller.
Our next caller your phone number ends in 332332. I'm going to ask you to unmute yourself.
There you are. Yes. Yes.
You may be Good evening.
Good evening. My name is Mitzi Nicoletti. I live at 1261 button rock drive Longmont, Colorado 80504. I'm calling to support the renewal of Dr. Helmets contract to continue our air quality monitoring in Longmont. I have found this information extremely helpful. And every day I look at it it helps me decide when it's healthy to go outside when it's healthy to exercise.
I appreciate the city of Longmont providing us with 24 seven air monitoring. Thank you.
Thank you next caller
The next caller, I'm going to call on your phone number ends in 492492. Can you unmute yourself?
Can you hear me? I sure can you begin.
Alright, thank you. Um, well thank you for having me. My name is Asha Romeo. I live at five to four flikr Avenue Longmont, Boulder, or Longmont, Colorado 80504. My I have or I am part of the Boulder County collective on the public safety team and I have a few demands from us that I'd like to read. Firstly, right size our policing force by reducing police responsibilities such as dealing with homelessness, mental health and truancy, thus giving our men in uniform upgrade and allocating resources towards community services in a way that solves the issues versus criminalizes it. Secondly, shift police oversight board into a public oversight board where there's transparency to those on it and the issues that they are addressing. Why should we be so afraid of our own police as to need to keep those on an oversight board hidden. Thirdly, start instituting a culture of transparency as it relates to all police use of force or arrests. All information on police use of force inside incidences must be released to public within 21 days especially all information from weapon discharge, force update rules and guidelines for firing a weapon fifth release of high definition recordings and imagery with any initial or subsequent data release. Lastly, continue developing a culture of transparency to include all data and reporting that relates to race, ethnicity, socio economic residency, or residency status, to name a few and is inclusive of metrics on stops, arrests and sentencing. Those are My points. Thank you for listening.
Thank you next caller. How many do we have left? Three, four.
Give me just a minute mare.
All right, let's keep going.
The next caller your phone number ends in 545545
are you gonna hear me? We sure can. You may begin.
Okay, good evening. I hope you're all doing well. My name is Alyssa Jane Jane. I grew up in Longmont. I live in Fox 455 Greenwood lane. I'm a member of the Boulder County collective as well. Before we are I would like to thank you all for opening the floor for discussion and I urge you to consider the following demands that we came up with as a collective. So firstly, a moratorium. a moratorium should be placed on all housing developments until the provision of quality housing for all of the unhoused members of our communities met. Secondly, given the heart But I'm going to do the pandemic we are currently going through long Why should cease and desist from any and all evictions until the pandemic is below one transmission per person. As you're all well aware of the pandemic has created uniquely difficult times for everyone. And at this time more than ever, we need to help the members of our community in any way possible. Thirdly, there needs to be Community Investment for by Fox to combat historic and ongoing wealth extraction and destruction. And lastly, a minimum of 25% low income units and 25% moderate income units should be incentivized with not required and all new housing developments to better reflect the needs of our community and to help make sure that we do not progress without regard for all members of our community, which can quickly lead to displace it and in turn gentrification. So thank you, finally, for listening and for your time, and we're glad to be back.
Thank you. It's calling.
Our next caller your phone number ends in 644644 Can you unmute yourself?
Color six four for your next
I'm going to go on to the next caller caller 781781. I'm going to ask you to unmute caller 781
There you are.
Can you hear us?
I see you're unmuted but we cannot hear you
can you hear are we now?
Yes, we can. You may begin. Thank you.
Okay, great. Thank you so much. I've been meaning to get to these meetings for a while. And I can thank my friends with the Boulder County collective for helping me get here. I'm with the health and wellness department of the Boulder County collective. My name is Erica Lee. I'm on Longmont native, and my address was five to six kimbark 80501. For the health and wellness sector, I demand immediate allocation of significant COVID County and local dollars to go towards social services in long term solutions that impact more than just downtown and go towards marginalized communities. Also wrap around medical, mental health and social services such as recovery cafe, re entry initiative, and restorative justice for not all current But also the projected on house population and you and lastly because quality relationship and communication are one of the key indicators of health and longevity according to the bluezone study, I demand that an empathy training ironically demanding an empathy training for the community as well as nonviolent communication courses be held publicly for ongoing maintenance for the highly polarized community culture we are currently a part of. Thank you so much.
One minute, let me they just reordered on my screen.
Hello, can you hear me?
We sure can. Thank you. You may Begin.
Thank you. My name is Dillard Madden gra and I'm, I leave it to 200 census streets one month, the London City Council and Mayor my husband and I heard about the possibility of regulating short term rentals. The second property it's even though we're extremely busy, I decided to call and unvoiced my objections. We just upgraded our rental property with hopes to rent it out for short term tenants. We already invested tons of money and our own labor. The property is five minutes away from our calls. And we have been working on that even in some weekends for the last year. Now we feel that the rug has been pulled out from under our seat. What a drafted policy change. Both accounts is one of the most educated in the nation. Have you used the scientific method in regards to this policy change? I took a graduate level policy making closet to Boulder and would expect that you collected the numbers that drive it's 41 what objectives for the policy change. Having a close, nice and neighborhood is not a valid policy objective to what are the costs to the community specifically associated with short term rentals, parking and parties are not specific to short term renting. These are present in rental and owns properties. Please verify the marginal increase, if any due to short term rentals. What are kinds of affected populations? And what populations will be affected by this change? Have you considered all those one month citizens who collect cleaning fees and maintenance and for whatever possible unintended consequences less business for restaurants and shops in Longmont? If this work was done, could you request a copy of the documentation as part of the public record disclosure? How many short term rental properties are registered in one month? Look at that number, and tell us with a straight face that this warrants drastic changes in the system policy in the country. Have pandemics and economic crisis and dramatic shortages to the seat of budgets. I will not even mention racial and justice issues plague in this community. If you'd like people to rent out their private properties on Airbnb, please tell us how this is going to solve annual view objectives. If you truly represent in this community, please do your job and provide thoughtful policies, not knee jerk reactions. Remember people do long term planning and need consistency for their livelihood. Thank you so much. Have a good day.
All right, thank you. next caller.
The next caller your phone number ends in 635635. There you are.
Can you hear us?
Hi, my name is killed all. I was a six or nine Terry Street.
it calling in to speak in favor of the charter change from 20 year to 30 year lease maximums to total no brainer to allow the city do the same thing every other municipal government on the face of the earth does and make long term commitments to nonprofits like hope or city on entities like PRP is a minor change to the charter that will help Longmont recover from the recession. I think every resident of long monitored vote for this also, my congratulations to Mr. Victor availa. Ms. Martin Marino and the members of alchemy day.
Do you have anything else sir? Nope, that's it. All right. Thank you very much.
There should be one more in the queue right? And he gets a video or she gets me to
our last caller is 644.
Can you unmute yourself
There you are.
Sorry about that.
My name is kyrsten Burris and at 1303 Carolina Avenue. And I wanted to just encourage the council to bring new Dr. helmig contract
for air quality monitoring just to protect the citizens from harmful air quality.
That's it. Thank you guys so much.
All right. Thank you. All right. That will conclude tonight's first call public invited to become be heard. Let's go ahead and move on to the redo on the special reports and presentations a proclamation designating August 2020 as El comitato long month month in Longmont, Colorado. With us, do we have Bella? We want to Susie Do we have big bell on the phone?
So I he, I got a message that he is on the call so if he can unmute himself or put his video on
Vic, I'm gonna ask you to unmute. Do you see that button on your screen?
Call him right now. Okay
I'm gonna go ahead and start reading the proclamation while you get him up to speed. This is a proclamation designating August 2020 is alchemy. They belong month month in Longmont, Colorado, whereas August 14 2020 marks the 40th year anniversary of a tragic event involving two Latino teams in the local police department that inspired the creation of Kumi de Longmont. And whereas Latino community leaders Victor Bella and Mark Moran co founded alchemy data on November 26 1980, and began to work with the Department of Justice to advocate for the rights of Latinos and improve community relations with local law enforcement in the community at large. And whereas accomadating Longmont is dedicated to working with diverse populations to overcome challenging social issues like immigration, homelessness and unemployment, and whereas accommodative online community bridge builder that promotes and expand self sufficiency for hundreds of 100 community members, and whereas Mark DiMartino recently retired from her position as executive director of comitato Omar after four decades of service, and whereas in his late 70s Victor l Vela, a US Army veteran and co founder of Oklahoma data, Walmart continues to act as a fierce advocate for Latinos in Longmont Now therefore I Brian j Bagley mayor, by virtue of the authority vested in me and the City Council, the city Walmart do hereby proclaim August 2020 as outcompeted a long month in Longmont. And I encourage all residents of this great city to congratulate and recognize the incredible work and contributions to the community by ultimately lamarche. Promote and advocate for social justice and racial equality for the past 40 years. Sign Mayor Bagley Do we have big back?
All right, maybe maybe we'll invite him to call in it public invited to be heard at the end?
Yes. He's on the call. And I told him to unmute and speak.
So I've asked him. I've tried to do that. Councilmember Hidalgo fairing and Mayor. They don't seem to be responding. Marta, can you unmute? I'm asking you to unmute. Do you see a button there on your screen? There you go. There's Marta, can you share your video now I'm going to ask you to start your video. up there's Vic. I'm going to ask Vic to unmute
Can you hear me? We sure can. Vic Go ahead. Sorry about that.
Okay, what do you want to say I did
Hello? We hear you
can you hear me?
Yes sir we can
I apologize guys don't know what I'm doing wrong.
If we can ever hear you're okay. Go for it. Big Brother.
Go for it. We can hear you.
You're okay. Talk. You can hear we hear you and see you
Marta, would you like to begin?
Yeah, do we just
read a proclamation Martha saying that you and Vic 40 years ago started up Clemente and that you and Vic and Acoma TK just do so much for our community and and advocating for Latino rights. So we thank you for your service. We think Vic for his service, and the proclamation was basically to recognize you, Vic and elcometer in general and for the significant work you've done over the last four decades.
So I have Nick on the line and I'm going to put him as loud as possible.
Okay, Vic, what do you have to say, sir?
Mr. Dominus and the city of Longmont. I'm honored This
proclamation, I will accept this, on behalf of all the other original founding members of Elko back in 1980. And all other members that joined after that, if a lizard for, for all them just was a mountain I Oh, it was a lot all of us combined to help make changes in the police department and I really feel so far the police department what the changes we did is helped so far, and I appreciate that. And it's I've seen the good, the bad and the ugly of this town. I was born and raised in here. And of course the ugly and the hole was windows two Hispanic boys got shot. But other than that, I'm proud to be a homeowner. And again, I'm honored. To be honest, shocked, I don't I don't do things like this to be recognized and took me by surprise and shot. Believe me a 77 Robot in order to get recognized not only from the city of Longmont, but the state of Colorado brings a heck of a lot to me and my family. And we appreciate everybody there for that Proclamation.
Mr. Bella, thank you again. Martha. Do you have something to say?
Yes, yes, yes, yes. Which I gotcha when I'm not just past my bedtime. I really want to thank you, Maggie and city council members, Herald for all you've done for this community and been glad being part of this community and enjoying being part of the organization since its inception. And I decided to retire it about a month ago, the eighth of July, but aversives will always be a boorish, we'll continue working. If people need me. I'm at home. I will listen to them. They can call me home. You know where I where I live. They can come to Home, maybe you need help it can help you to remember, it was really an honor to get the proclamation from from you all and, and the county and the state also, and our flag or flag, Victor got the got the United States black and I got the Colorado flag, which was really an honored and grateful for my family, my husband, because without them, you know, a lot of times we can do anything, but it's always been for the for the passion and not to get recognized recognition, but it's our right our responsibility and our obligation when you're part of a community to come and work together. And I've been so happy that nothing has happened. You know, like other states have been happening having problems that we are a community that can come and talk and be part of and help each other because we will learn from each other. We are in a We're not perfect, we will make mistakes. But that's what we're about. So we are here to stay, and whenever you need help, I'm very, very, very grateful for what you have done. And so, I'm here to say, and my goodness that we're very, very proud and honored to have been recognized in WeChat. Gracias.
Gracias, Sati. Marta?
All right, so let's go on. Are we doing okay? Let's go ahead and read through the consenting. Sorry, just remember they don't not offering Go ahead.
Imagine how many families she's impacted through the 40 years of service she's done to the Latino community and local families and immigrants. 30 years. That's all A lot of years, how many of us could say we've been on one job for 40 years? And how many of us could say, how many families see a packet and help? That's a lot of years. I just wanted to recognize her for all that.
No, thank you. That's a great point, Martha. I would say thank you for all you've done, but I know I'm gonna keep I get messages from you all the time people are looking for you ain't going nowhere. Sorry. But we do appreciate what you've done so far. Thanks, Martha.
All right. Let's go ahead and move on to the consent agenda. Don key read that for us, please.
I can Mayor item nine as ordinance 2020 dash 34. A bill for an ordinance amending section 4.1 6.010 of the Longmont municipal code on allowable investment second reading and public hearing scheduled for September 8 2029. b is resolution 2020 79 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont in the state of Colorado Department of Revenue for access to the Department of Revenue sales and use tax software. Nine C's resolution 2020 dash at a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont in the state of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for covert surveillance testing of long months wastewater 90 is resolution 2020 dash 81 a resolution of Longmont city council approving a fourth amendment to the intergovernmental agreement between the city and boulder for repair and remediation from flooding. Nine Year's resolution 2020 dash 82 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving a First Amendment to the intergovernmental agreement between the city and Boulder County for repair and remediation of the special property from flooding. Nine F is resolution 2020 dash 83 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city and the Colorado Department of Transportation for grant Funding for high visibility impaired driving enforcement. Nine G is resolution 2020 dash 84 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city and Office of Justice Programs. US Department of Justice for grant funding for BJ a fiscal year 20 coronavirus emergency supplemental funding program. Nine H's resolution 2025. a resolution of the Longmont city council urging Longmont citizens to vote yes on the ballot question concerning issuing up to $80 million in bonds payable from the city's water utility enterprise revenues to finance water system improvements, including but not limited to the Nelson Flanders water treatment plant expansion project, and replacement of aging water system infrastructure, including treated water storage and transmission water lines on the November 3 2020 coordinated municipal election ballot. Is resolution 2020 dash 86 a resolution of the Longmont city council urging Longmont citizens to vote yes, on the ballot issue of proving a change to the state city's charter to allow for 30 year leases of city property on the November 3 2020 coordinated election ballot and nine j is approved to capital improvement program amendments.
Alright, do we have a motion?
I will move the consent agenda as read councilor waters.
Yeah, Mayor Bagley thanks. Just a question item eight i is which I I'm gonna vote for the resolution to encourage voters to support the charter change. Item 12. And I just had an Could you take off what the voting screen that you just put up Susan or whoever did that? So I can see my screen. Thank you. Item 10 D is the is the second reading that actually formalizes putting that on the ballot should we wait to pass the resolution to encourage people to vote for it until after we formally voted to put it on the ballot.
We can't we're not allowed to. We're not allowed to comment once it's on the ballot is my understanding. Eugene, are you there?
Stop Angry Birds and come back to council meeting Eugene.
That'd be Candy Crush man. Oh, candy.
So I think Councilmember waters raises a great point. I thought about it to that until the ordinance submitting the matter to the ballot is approved, that we shouldn't be voting on the resolution, urging voters so if you wanted to pull that off the calendar first reading, do second reading come back. That would make procedural sense.
I'm going to go ahead and pull it in. So all adjust my own motion for the consent agenda.
We have a second m h and h are no
no no All right.
The 30 year lease of property here. All right, we have a second on the consent agenda or we can move on. Alright, great, but it's been moved and seconded by Councilmember waters there. I second to the Councilmember waters Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Hi. Opposed say nay.
Right, Paul, I didn't see your mitt. Let's move. Did you vote aye or nay?
I vote aye.
All right. So that kid that passes unanimously, the consent agenda passes all except I. What's I don't think anything's gonna be that confrontational night. So let's sit through ordinances on second reading. Actually, let's go ahead and take a five minute break. And anybody waiting to speak for any of the second ordinances on second reading, calling now and get in the queue. And we're not going to be taking breaks. So I'm calling now if you want to participate in the public hearings, we'll be back in five
All right, are we all back
All right, looks like we're all back. So let's go ahead and move on to orbits in second reading and public hearings on the following matters. First of all, item 10 A ordinance 20 2030. A bill for an ordinance making additional appropriations for expenses and liabilities the city Walmart for fiscal year beginning January 1 2020. Are there any questions from council? All right, seeing none, let's go ahead and open the public hearing on ordinance 2020 dash 30. Do we have anybody in the queue done?
Mayor This is Susan and No we don't.
Okay, so then we will officially I will open the hearing but unless somebody somehow miraculously pops on, we will assume that nobody's in there. So stop me if for some reason somebody reaches out. Alright, so we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. We have a motion please.
Move approval of ordinance
120 20 dash
All right, it's been moved by Councilmember waters seconded
sounds like Councilmember Martin. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, Motion carries unanimously. All right can be ordered 2020 that's 31 a bill for an ordinance amending titles 4.04 4.05 and 6.08. The Longmont municipal code on sales and use tax lodgers tax and retail business licenses and creating a new code section 4.0 4.105 terms of enacting the Colorado municipal League's model ordinances off a model ordinance on economic Nexus and Economic Census, economic Nexus and regular session August 25 2020. page three marketplace facilitators for self collecting Home Rule municipality is part of a statewide sales tax simplification effort to have emotion. Actually no motion yet. Do we have a staff report? I
don't think there is right there. Questions. Jasper Christiansen No.
Else Mr. Christiansen?
No, I was just gonna move that we that we passed ordinance 20 2031.
public hearing Yes.
Yeah, we'll go. We will go ahead and have a public hearing before we vote. So who's second to that?
It's been moved and seconded. There's nobody in the call and we'll go ahead and open it for public hearing. slon somebody texted me see if somebody else is trying to get in. And it's not. So let's go ahead and vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the motion passes unanimously. 10 see orders 2020 x 32. A bill for an ordinance amending title 6.8 and warm up municipal code on retail business license. Any questions from council All right, seeing none, let's go ahead and open it to public hearing. Nobody's on the line. So it's just a matter of procedure. All right, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Let's go ahead and ask for a motion
on approval of 2020. desk 32.
All right. I'm going to go ahead, Counselor Peck. moved it. I'm going to take your second motion. Dr. Waters is a Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the Motion carries unanimously. ordinance 2020 s 33. Section 10. d a bill for Northern submitting to the registered electors, the city Longmont, Colorado, actually, yes. A bill for an ordinance submitted to the registered electors the city of Longmont, Colorado at a special municipal election be held on November 3 2020. an amendment to the city of Longmont Home Rule charter while for the lease of city property for up to 30 years on so let's go ahead Are there any questions from council
Thank you my badly. My one concern about moving this to 30 years is the contract we have I think it was with AWS to sell water to oil and gas for fracking. I am against having that be on a 30 years.
I know that this is just to move it along.
Well, actually, this is so so it's not saying that all leases will be 30 years. The the contract we have with a NW will still expire when it's set to expire. But But when we go to renew it, I mean, we don't have to even renew it at all. We don't have to do we can do it for one years, five years. 30 years is just the maximum.
So I just wanted to put my voice out there as to why. Everything that you said thank you for clarifying.
All right, perfect. All right. Um, any other questions or comments from council? All right, seeing Harold You look like you want to say something but I think I said it again. say, All right. Let's go ahead and open public hearing. Anybody else online though, right? That's correct me or no? All right. We'll go ahead and close public hearing. Can I ask for a motion please?
Move approval of ordinance 20 2033.
I'll second. Excellent. My counselor Martin second moved by Dr. Water saying that my counselor Martin.
Single for the debate. Is quitting vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay.
All right. The motion passes unanimously. All right. Briefly, let's go ahead and return to item nine. I resolution 2020 dash 86. a resolution Aloma city council urging Longmont citizens to vote yes in the ballot issue approving a change the city's charter to allow for 30 year leases of city property on November 3 2020 coordinated election ballot. To be of emotion Dr. Waters well Move approval. All right. All right. It's been moved by Dr. Water seconded by Councillor Martin, Casper Christiansen, please.
Ah, I don't actually approve of this, but I do approve of putting it on the ballot for the people of the city to vote for. And I object to the language that we have started using or maybe we always used, saying that we are urging the voters to vote for something I think we should just let the voters vote for it without us urging them one way or the other. Right. I find that really odd language to use when we're trying to put a ballot issue.
I don't see what else I guess I would just say I think it's wholly appropriate to urge people to vote for things because usually like bond measures, we're usually taking action to try to convince and we usually need to get things done and pursuant to city charter and state law and time We need to go to the voters to get their approval. And I think oftentimes it's important to let people know that city council can't do it without them, but we think it's important. But let's go ahead and not see nobody else who couldn't vote. The motion before us is resolution 2020 dash 86. Resolution Aloma city council urging Roman citizens to vote yes in the validation. You're proving you'll change the city's charter to allow for 30 year leases of city property on the upcoming coordinated election ballot. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Nay. All right, so the motion carries six to one with Councillor Christiansen opposed. All right, let's now move on to general business 12 a resolution 2020 dash 87 a resolution along with City Council ordering a notice of public hearing a petition to establish the LFM business improvement district Carol, who would you like to have present to us
that will be Tony Ciccone. Tony's at the bottom
of my screen. I don't know where he is on yours.
Only go far on mine. So. Okay.
Good evening of Mayor Bagley, members of council. So this item has been brought to your attention. It's in regards to the city's receipt of a request or a petition to create what is known as a business improvement district which is allowed under state statute. It's also referred to as a b iD, if you're familiar with that. It's being proposed for an area of the city, a parcel of land that is on hoever Street, just north of Rogers road and actually immediately to the north of Home Depot. It's currently bacon. So a little bit about the B ID in terms of what's allowed or not allowed. By the way, I've covered all this information in the Report. We'll be glad to answer any questions for the report but give you a brief overview. So, it is it is permitted by state statute it was established as a means to improve business, the business environment in a particular area. The VAD can be used to make improvements, operate improvements, and then also can serve to provide operational functions and services. So for example, they could do collective marketing for that particular business area. It also does have the ability to impose fees and taxes on commercial property, it does not permit the imposition of those on residential properties. The B ID is permitted in the state statutes as permitted under Title 31, which pertains to municipal powers and functions of cities and towns. You may ask, why is is this covered under our special districts ordinance? And the answer to that is no. The ordinance that we currently have for special districts is in response to title 32, which is specific to the creation of special districts under state statute. So given the lack of having an ordinance that applies to be IDs we are required the city is required to follow the statutory requirements for fulfillment. So basically, the statute requires that upon receipt of a completed petition to the city, the matter has to be set for a hearing by the City Council. No less than 20 days or more than 40 days after is received. So we did receive all the organizational documents and operating plan and as of August 7, upon receipt of Have a $5,000 deposit to help us cover some of the external costs with its processing. The applicant or the petitioner fulfilled the requirements under state statute. So given that, that's why we are before you tonight is to adopt a resolution that would set forth the hearing, the hearing would be set forth for September 8, September 8 falls within the allowable 40 day limitation.
Right. So do we have a motion for resolution 2020 dash 87 or questions transfer back? Oh, if I could.
Just to let you know, we do actually have both Carolyn white representing the outside counsel for the city in attendance. And we also have Mr. Russell Dykstra, who represents the petitioner, and he did have a very short presentation he would like to put forth to counsel.
Let's go ahead and have that presentation. Then.
Right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of council appreciate it. I'll try to keep this as brief as possible given the hour. The presentation was in your meeting packet around Oh, there we go, can be shared. So if we could just go through the first two slides, they just give you a general idea of the area that we're talking about. So you can get oriented on it, and then the next page and I think the question is, why are we asking and petitioning City Council for a business improvement district? as Tony accurately pointed out, a business improvement district is just that it's for business. It's for commercial, it does not involve residential property. Residents are not in any way taxed for this and it's a tool It is a tool that is used to help fund development costs and Business Improvement costs. and in this situation in particular, we go to the next slide. There are quite a few factors that made the petitioners say we need some help with this project. It's just not working the way most normal projects work due to the extraordinary situation. And I'll just highlight those your typical project of this size we've done several amongst the throughout the state and the public improvement costs average between three and $4 million for this type of project. In this one, we're looking at public improvement only costs that are in excess of 7 million. I think more importantly, because of city requirements for dedication, we have 30% of the public property is going to be required to be dedicated for public purposes for a detention pond and a major artery roadway. That's a pretty significant loss of leasable and sellable ground and a commercial project. So that that emphasizes, again, the inability with the increased costs. Also the inability to offset those increased costs with more developable land. And I think the bottom two points are important in the current environment were with COVID and the Amazon effect that I'm sure you're aware of online sales, retail projects, and especially with COVID we're seeing a hesitancy and difficulty in getting private capital and it's at an extremely high rate, which makes these types of projects very difficult to develop right now. The benefit of a business improvement district is it takes advantage of bonding capabilities for governmental entities that will allow us to take advantage of where we're being told in the four to 5% range versus the private market, which is nine to 12% range. So those are the major advantages and if we could scroll down, there's a there's a comparison between title 32 special districts, specifically Metropolitan districts and what a business improvement district is. I won't go through this line by line. I think. If we scroll down to the benefits of a b iD, I've tried to encapsulate the distinctions. The primary one is a bi d is only commercially assessed property, the minute any property within the boundaries of a big becomes assessed as residential it automatically by state law is removed from the district. Why is that important? There are no residential voters within the district. So it's not going to impact or have an effect on the city's general bonding questions that you're putting forth to your residents and citizens. The voters are only commercial property owners and lessees.
So those property owners are made fully aware, especially in a new project like this. Before they sign a lease before they buy a pad in this property, they're fully aware of what the big deal is what the obligations to the VIP are. The other distinguishing factor is most Metropolitan districts. Once you wind them up and approve them, they're very independent. You may get an annual report from them, but the Unless they deviate from their service plan, the city really has no ability to work with them and adjust things over time. A B ID is specific in that every September, we have to come back with a new operating plan or we're a continuation of the existing operating plan for the city to see what we're doing, how it's being done. It includes a budget for the following year, and allows the city to review it comment on it and provide input on it as well. So it gives the city a more hands on oversight process. And we've we've seen that also with VIPs that they help with the commercial investment process due to the financing help that they provide, especially for more difficult projects. The process is the next slide. I've just laid those out. Again, I'm available for any questions council or Mayor may have Tony's help. And I know this is a new thing for the city and I don't want to take time unnecessarily. But I want to be available to answer any questions.
I've got a question. Can we get the can we pop the you don't want your presentation now? Yes, sir. Can we pop up so I can see all counsel, please? Excellent. I guess the only the only thing I have is so first of all, let me let me state what I'm going to say by saying First of all, I am completely I'm a capitalist. People who know me know I'm a capitalist, I'm pro development, pro growth, pro jobs, pro economy. However, I'm this particular I also believe that it's the city government myself, especially as mayor to facilitate things like you're proposing, you know, to invite business to town provide jobs and, and just glom on to thrive. However, I do also feel that we have Have to give people met the ball developers all landowners equal access and opportunity, this particular piece of land, if you compare this piece of land to all the other developments and potential land or locations in Longmont, over the last nine years I have probably spent, I think city staff has spent more time working with this particular group trying to explore ways to use the property. And at the end, it never works. And so I personally have just put it out there. I'm tired of dealing with this particular piece of land. So on one hand, it's our job to facilitate it. But at the same time, I don't want to see this piece of land back if we vote yes on this meaning. It's not our responsibility to figure out how to do a project. And we I just I personally don't get paid enough to do deal with this piece of land. So I'm going to go yes on this. But my patience is pretty much out when it comes to this particular parcel.
Tony, you raised your hand.
Yeah, just a couple points of clarification from presentation. So in your packet, you would have received a map showing the entire ownership parcel, and then also a red line on that indicating the district boundary, which is the commercial piece of it. There's also a portion of that site that they intend to build a residential project on. But that is not included within the district boundaries or the service area boundaries. So that clarification the other point of clarification to NIH is that the point of tonight's meeting is to set the hearing, which is actually required by state statute,
what this would do Vote tonight would set the hearing on the matter. And then that keeps us in compliance with state statute.
Right. Again, not the only reason I sent my comment was like I said, I'm going to move it forward. But this comes up so often. And it's a big project and we talk about it. We argue and debate it. We take time from our families and other people who meet our attention as public servants, and it doesn't ever go anywhere. So my advice to this particular group is Mr. Dykstra, you your your your your, your crew, I hope you're good because I don't want to talk about this again during my my mayorship, it's either this or nothing. Dr. Waters.
So just to clarify, Tony, what you want us to do simply you want an action to put it on on the agenda for September 8 for hearing. If we have specific questions, you want us about the project, zoning anything else you want us to wait and see. till September 8,
you can pose questions and get response tonight, but it's not the official hearing on the matter. The resolution before us tonight we'll set the official hearing which at which time, all parties can also have conversation on the matter.
All right, I'm happy to wait till September 8.
But I'd appreciate that Dr. Waters counselor pack.
Your bag lady, I agree with everything that you said about about this piece of property. But I was wondering if we can have a clarification on what the acronym bit is for people who are listening
is this Improvement District? Okay.
Yeah, that's obvious. The other thing Tony, does this property and I couldn't tell from the map. Does this go into our RSVP where we have the discussion about the split flow?
Um, no, I see her ugly. No,
very Just enough on that. I know that this area is subject to significant flooding, right? As a result, yes. Okay,
now the split for channel is
just down it's just to the north north of Rogers road so this does not encroach in that.
Okay, thank you.
Tell us more Christiansen
Thank you, Mr. Extra. You're a very good man. This piece of land has had a sign up for the last since I moved here in 1989. New shopping center coming soon it said for about 20 years. So you know, it's it's a an interesting piece of property on a main street, which has potential for giving us some really good businesses, but I am sure you do know that it is a flooded area. And also there are a lot of people just to the north of this who are going to be unhappy about the fact that in your attempt to not make it a flooded area, you may be flooding their property. So, it's it's a difficult piece of property and Ay, ay. Ay, ay. congratulate you for being brave enough to take it on. Can you? I can't see all of your the name of your company. It just says Russ Dykstra partners spins
it's Spencer Fane. We're a law firm we specialize in special districts and businesses, districts.
Okay. All right. Um, that's all I had to do. I think we should set up the meeting is because that's the law and go ahead, move ahead with that.
You want to make a motion
The dark haired That's right.
I'm going to do it you second. I'm going to move resolution 2020 dash 87 a resolution along with City Council ordering a notice of public hearing a petition to establish the LFM business improvement district. Thank you Mayor Bagley.
Yes, that's it. I can't do it.
All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Mr. Dykstra. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it.
All right, let's move on to the boulder air contract renewal. And so I think I mean, just not I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that we've talked about this a lot. And I think that I pretty sure that we have a unanimous vote. I know that we've gotten lots of emails, and I think there's a lot of there I don't think is any controversy on this point. So Councillor Martin
Well, there is no Controversy, I believe, on re approving the contract. And I understand that we did get some advice from city attorney about the additions to in the amendment to the contract, task three. But nevertheless, I think that we need to have some questions answered about why these restrictions on publication and dissemination of the data have been introduced. I understand that the city may need time to prepare a response if Dr. Helmick is going to make a statement about his findings, and that's fine. But it is not clear to me that these provisions as they are currently written, can't be used to essentially Eliminate academic freedom by preventing some some opinions on the data or some new results from getting out of the city at all. So I would I like to go over those points cuz I just need reassurance that these are not going to be abused.
Right so that so I'm seeing counselor Christian counselor pack but it looks like we've got enough council members to have a discussion I just remind everybody that there's no I mean we can get our questions answered at the end of the day. We're going to give direction and everybody on Council is in agreement. So at least that is my that is my guess I could be wrong if somebody doesn't want to repeat the contract but looks like Dr. Turner's here. Harold is she up.
Turner, do you want to go ahead
Good evening, I do have a brief presentation.
yeah, like that's coming up now. I'm Jane Turner, I'm listening with Longmont oil and gas and air quality coordinator. And I'll be presenting tonight on the proposed folder air contract renewal, which staff is bringing before Council on behalf of the City Manager under purchasing code for 12 080. Next slide. Just a bit of background on the contract in March 2019 Council received a presentation by Dr. helmig, a folder outlining and proposed Air Quality Monitoring Program, council directed staff to contract motor Air Services starting in April 2018. One year later in April of 2020. The contract was extended to August 31 2020. And that extension was made to account for additional time that was needed to find locations to install the monitoring equipment at the beginning of the study. Last month on July 28, staff arranged for council to hear an updated presentation from Dr. helmig. summarizing the air quality data collected so far, with the August 35 31st contract expiration coming up staffs now asking council to consider renewing the existing contract. Additionally, staff is recommending an extension of the contract term from a one year term to a 16 month term, which would result in the contract renewal beginning on September 1 2020, and expiring on the last day of 2021. This extension would simplify future budgeting and renewals by aligning it with the calendar year. contract renewal specifies that the monitoring costs for the remainder of 2020 would be $116,211. And the monitoring for the year 2021 would be $348,632. staff is also recommending an addendum to the existing contract the agent has been discussed in detail and agreed to by boulder air. It details expectations for communications between boulder air and the city. And it also provides guidelines for reports and analysis and establishes a clear schedule for those deliverables. We understand that Council and some residents have questions about the terms outlined in the addendum, particularly those in task three, which is titled data sharing communication and public outreach. So I've been asked to quickly go through each of the five statements included in task three of the addendum, and I'll try to explain the city's motivation for including these statements, and obviously open the floor for questions afterwards.
The first statement in task three is that bolder air will provide the city with written notice of publications and or public presentations, wherein the cities data will be analyzed or interpreted at least seven days prior to release of information. In turn, the city will notify the consultant of permission or denial within five days of request, and the city reserves the right to prohibit use of the data by any party including the consultant without the Express written permission of the city. The city's requesting notice about publications and presentations that discuss one month air quality data so that staff can ensure that the people funding this work, namely long months, residents can be made aware of upcoming presentations of their data, and also that city staff can be prepared to answer any questions from the public or the press about those presentations. This statement was added because when city staff aren't aware that Longmont state is being presented, or what conclusions are being made about the data, it does make it difficult for staff to be prepared to answer questions about the presentations when we receive phone calls from residents and to help them understand the findings presented.
the next statement asks folder air to Inform the city of any communications the consultant has with journalists or media regarding analysis or interpretation of the city's data by the end of the day in which the statement is made. As a result of public interest in Boulder air monitoring data, Dr. helmig is approached regularly by the press and he's been asked to comment on his findings. Here again, the city simply asking to be notified of statements made about long months data so that if staff receives questions from residents or from the press as a follow up to Dr. Hill makes comments, we have some knowledge about the statements that have been made, and prepare staff to be on the lookout for news articles which may discuss long months data. The next statement says consultant is an independent contractor and is not authorized to represent city's views or positions. Accordingly, consultants shall not make any statement regarding the city's views or positions on air quality, including but not limited to opinions, analysis and conclusions about the data and less Specifically authorized in writing to speak about the city's views or positions. This statement was added to clarify that bullet air has been hired to collect and analyze air quality data, but it's not authorized to express the city of long months views or positions in regard to the air quality data. It staffs view that the positions or policies the city should be communicated by city council members or city officials. Slide five the last slide. And this states that the city may from time to time enter into data sharing agreements with other entities to permit downloadable access to the data resulting from this agreement. city shall notify consultant of any such agreement. And the consultant will share downloadable data only pursuant to a data sharing agreement between the city and another entity. also stated here is that anytime data is transferred as part of a data sharing agreement consultants shall notify the city. So that's a very wordy way of saying that researchers that want to use the air quality data are asked to complete a data sharing agreement with the city of Longmont. Now it may seem that long months air quality data is already publicly available because it can be viewed on builder airs website. But the graphs on the website are simplified representations of preliminary data, and that data can be downloaded from the website. If someone wanted to actually analyze the data and publish their analysis in a scientific journal, they would need the full set of air quality data. This extensive data set that is being generated by builder air includes millions of lines of data as well as significant amounts of metadata about each data point recorded. Voter air in the city of Longmont are in agreement that the full data set should only be a made of made available to those who are interested in serious air quality analysis. So as a result site who are interested in the data are asked to request a data sharing agreement from the city. And once the agreement is in place, the city works with boulder err to transfer their large datasets over to the researchers. To be clear, the city has no intention of taking down the publicly available website. This statement was added to the contract addendum only to ensure that researchers using this data are handling and transferring it appropriately. And that was the last of the communication statements, as I mentioned, and staff is requesting direction on the renewal of this contract. So I'll turn it back over to you counsel.
All right, let's go ahead Marsha and then Paulie.
Only because Marsha was already asking the question, that's it. Go ahead.
Thanks. Mayor Begley on Can you put the slide up with the first bullet point in under task three, please?
So I understand the reason given for wanting the seven days of notification. However, I do not understand the reason why or the conditions under which the city would deny permission for access to the data. I was present when the original agreement with Dr. Helmick was being discussed in the very early stages. And one of the essential points of making this investment was that the data should be free.
Eugene, do you want to weigh on this, I understand. This is kind of standard language
Marin council using a city attorney.
So we are just asking if he's going to be using our data. The city owns the data, that we'd be made aware of presentations in advance where these presentations as we understand it are usually scheduled weeks to months in advance. And so it's not doctor how much data to do with what he pleases. The city is paying half a million dollars over the next year and a half to generate this data and just wants to be informed about what sort of presentations he's giving and what he's using our data for.
Again, I ask I You know, I have allowed that the city has a right to be informed. But the intent of this project was that the information should be free for scientific analysis not I mean, free in the sense of without charge, because if there's a charge for the data transference or something, I think the city is probably entitled to recoup its expenses, but that the city should put the information under wraps and only allow it to be published under for reasons that the city approves. I don't approve of that. And I have not heard any assurance based on this language that the city wouldn't do that. You know, I can see, oh, well, we don't want everybody to know that Longmont has this problem with its air quality, so we're not going to allow that to be published. No, I can't. I can't really concur with that idea. And while I absolutely want to continue with Dr. Hill Meigs research and for Longmont to continue doing it. I think that this is a change in the intent of the project and the change and unwelcome change in in the city of Longmont and people have long months understanding of what this project is here for.
We're here to take direction from Council, the data is put up on the website in near real time. If council wants to give direction on modifying a contract term, you know, Dr. Helmet has already agreed to all the terms of this contract but that's part of the purpose of the agenda item tonight is to get a council input and to make modifications as directed.
Well, then I would like to move that any denial of of use of the data Any denial of a presentation has to be approved by the City Council.
I was gonna suggest if I could just interrupt Councilmember Martin and Mayor Bagley, I think staff is fine with that. It was never staffs intent to deny the use of the information. Frankly, I would be fine removing the condition of the city denial. Our interest here was simply to know that presentations were going to be made so as to not be surprised when either the press or others were calling staff about it. And so I can understand the council is concerned about that. And I believe we can make that kind of a modification to the agenda. If that is the general direction the council wants to go.
Yes. Do we need a second interval or are we just going to take your word for it?
I can go either way.
You need to Second if you're going to make that motion to I
think Councilmember Christiansen was trying to second it. Okay.
If we are modifying contract language I'd like a little more specificity as to our you know, is this deleting the last few sentences is the deleting the word denial.
We're here to take direction
other computer just died. So I can't read it if Mr. Adam maker is willing to remove the whole paragraph and I'm willing to remove the whole paragraph,
although we have a we have a mayor.
We can't hear you.
So the mayor is unmuted but we're not able to hear
hear me. Now. There we go. All right, cuz I'm like Shut up. Everybody was one time out. The motion that's on the floor. motion that I will call it everybody who's hands rates. The motion that's on the floor was to instruct and direct the city manager, the city attorney's office to put into the contract and Eugene, you can put whatever language you need to, but the city shall not deny the use of the data without Council's approval. Was that your motion? Councilmember Martin.
That was my motion and I would entertain a friendly amendment to take out the council approval.
So it it has been it has been seconded, and now we can go ahead and move on. So I apologize. I don't know. I guess I don't know how to work the equipment. I believe it was Councilmember Peck. First we'll go with john will temple.
Okay. Thank you, counsel. Councilwoman, Martin, thank you for that. That was exactly what I was going to ask but I want to go if you'll take a friendly amendment to go a bit further and take that whole paragraph out. I feel that if if the city is going to make or have Dr. helmig sign in A contract that says he will not use the views or the position of the city, that should be enough, we should trust that he is not going to do that. Unless we have somebody at every single one of those presentations to make sure he doesn't do that we have to have trust that when he says he will not use the opinions, I don't know of any other contract, either with Boulder County or the city of Boulder that has this kind of specific specificity in it, as far as making him give, give the city all the presentations so that they can give him permission to use the data or not.
I'd like to hear from the rest of the council before saying whether I can accept the amendment or not. Is that allowable?
Sure. Well, although Hello anytime pursuant to the rules of procedure, Counselor. Correct. Hillsboro Packer anyone can make a motion to amend and then we'd vote on the amendment but
did you already Say what you had to say Casper Christiansen?
No, I didn't. Because all I got to say was that I second
I think Councilwoman Martin for bringing this up to me, having run my own business for eight or so years and having created many contracts, having to do with intellectual property, mine. And having seen how my father was, who was a scientist was abused by this. To me, this is an issue of someone being able to keep their intellectual property versus signing a work for hire agreement. This is on its basic level of work for hire agreement, and the only conditions under which that is allowable. I believe this is still true based upon CC and VB Read and playboy enterprises incorporated for the Duma is that is someone who has one scientists and two that they meet nine qualifications, none of which are applicable here. In many Europe, places in Europe, most of Europe in the United Kingdom, you cannot sign away your intellectual property. And I believe that this city should hold up to that sort of standard is that we don't force people to give up their intellectual property. There. We have a clear thing here where we are. We are dividing it between Dr. helmig under Councilman Martin's amendment would be able to talk and give us notice that he's going to do a presentation and then he is free to discuss the scientific analysis of his work. Because it is his work. It is his intellectual property. He created this system, he created the machines, etc. But he obviously isn't free to discuss policy city policy, because that's our job and the city. And I don't think he really well, I don't know. Mr. Dr. Helmick has never contacted me. So I don't know. Most scientists are not really interested in getting into political policy or city policy. So to me, this is an issue of intellectual property and work for hire agreements, which are notoriously unfair, and I don't want us to participate in that. So I thank Councilman harden for bringing this up. I do think that we all want to have we all want Longmont to stand for fair agreements. As Councilman Peck said, this is not part of the agreements with boulder and Brownfield which he also has. So I would Still set stand up for Councilman Martens agreement. amendment and also Councilwoman pecks
a friendly amendment
All right, cuz we're already like Casper waters.
And I'm going to be just on the opposite side of both the motion and the second and the comments that have been made. For me this is a workflow a
that we're paying, we're paying somebody a lot of money to collect and analyze our data. It's the taxpayers of Longmont are purchasing the services of an expert. And, and I would I would take strong objection to first of all, I think we're micromanaging a contract that we have no business micromanaging, we're in the weeds on this. And if we're going to talk about trust, we're making a real statement about the trust and in our confidence in the capacity of our staff, that we're going to get into this level of a contract in my opinion. It's a manage to manage, I guess what we don't we don't trust about their ability to deal with with the contractor here or the contract he This is our data, there is no intellectual property that we can debate the concept of intellectual property. If he takes our data and create something of value. He's created intellectual property, but he's done it with our data. Right? And if he does, that, he ought not to do it without our permission. If he's going to share the data with somebody else who's going to make a profit on it, he ought not to be able to do that without our permission, because the taxpayers have one month paid for. So this is not we're not an academic institution. This is in my view. This is not about academic freedom. This is about contract management. I do have questions, ultimately about how we arrived at $1 figure I'm going to support the contract. But I'd like to know how we got to these dollar figures. Is it deliverable by deliverable to be on schedule? Is that how we rolled it up? But on the issue of, of getting into the weeds on contract management, I think we're making a mistake I think we're making the wrong kind of statement I fundamentally disagree with the concepts laid out here about intellectual property.
I'm just I guess I'm just gonna say is my concern is the reason I said what I said in the beginning. This is a simple contract that the parties have I mean, the city and Weiss We are the city but the the guy doing the information agrees with contract in why we're sitting here debating this. The questions that come to mind, are we really talking about city council interests? Are we representing Colorado rising? Or are we talking about environmental groups want access to the information this is our data? And and this is we're not we didn't set aside half million bucks to like just, you know, fund some, some research study that's going to champion a general cause this is for the city of Longmont and Are data and I think that it should be accessible to the public. And I think it's great that that I think it's sufficient if the city council just says we're not going to deny or I think it's okay if we're just not going to deny its use or unless it goes to Council. But we, in all due deference to Councilmember Christiansen, this intellectual property all the time, I mean, I mean, people do work patents research. It's this is not a fair unfair contract. Both parties agree this should be just a simple approval, and move on. But anyway, Councillor Martin.
I actually agree with both arguments as someone who would be much richer if if inventors got to keep their own intellectual property regardless of who paid for having it none of these You know, we have to come to the understanding that intellectual property is the property of the of the person who funds it not for the person who from whose mind, it springs from. And in this country, at least a lot of stuff wouldn't get done. On the other hand, I mean, my argument is much more narrow, because the original reasoning behind us entering into this agreement was to make this is to learn this learning and make it available to the people of Colorado so that they can act in our own so that we can act in our own defense to force agencies to clean up our air. So I actually believe that the data produced does belong to them. The city of Longmont in Longmont can license that data as it sees fit at some point. But I do not think that we should be able to deny the publication of scientific analysis. So maybe the compromise is to go back to my original motion. And so say that if the if the city has a reason to deny a publication or a presentation on this data, then the council must approve the reasoning and otherwise, that the the
intellectual property can be released.
I'm gonna go ahead and call the question. It's not debatable. Let's just vote we need five if we get five we vote on the original motion and we're done. On favorite calling question of voting say aye.
Aye. Opposed say nay.
All right, it passes unanimously. Let's go ahead and Vote The motion is to accept the contract directing the city city attorney's office to alter the contract language so that the city cannot deny use of the data unless that denial is approved by city council. Is that correct? Councillor Martin?
No, actually, it applies in paragraph one. It applies only to publications and presentations based on the data and does not apply to transfers of the data to another researcher which is covered in later paragraphs.
Okay. Thank you for the clarification. All right. Let's go ahead and vote on the motion. All in favor say aye.
Aye. Opposed say nay.
Nay. All right. The motion carries six to one with Dr. Waters. dissenting. Thank you guys. Alright, let's move on to 12 D board appointment to the water board to fill a recent vacancy.
I'm see hear me You're badly I think Got 12 c climate action?
Ah, sorry. Oh, sorry. Oh, let's go ahead and do the real quick because it shouldn't take too long.
And then my understanding was that somebody quit and we have somebody who wants to be on the board, right?
Correct. Here we got a resignation, someone moving out of the city and since you just interviewed applicants, Councilmember Martin, who is liaison to the ward suggested we bring back those two remaining applicants of the three you appointed one, which was Alison Gould. Now to this new vacancy, you have two other candidates who could appoint one was Scott holik and the other was Brian Foster. So Councilmember Martin thought it might make sense to just make an appointment now instead of waiting till end of the year.
Someone want to make a motion.
I move Scott hallway.
Second. All right.
All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Alright, eyes have it unanimously. Thank you very much. All right. Well see Climate Action Task Force recommendations Herald, I believe Annie nobles around or somewhere.
Yeah, Mayor Council. And you know what's going to start out is
This is the first, before I even get started. This is the first presentation based on the feedback that we've received from the advisory boards as we talk to you all, she's actually going to talk about other steps that we're going to take that before we dug into more work in bringing you back specific projects and what that's gonna look like we wanted to get your take based on the advisory boards feedback. So this is we're gonna chunk this into pieces. And
thank you, could you start the presentation.
Mayor Bagley, members of council I'm Annie noble Environmental Services Manager in public works in natural light. Sources and I'm filling in tonight for Lisa Knobloch She recently had a baby. Tonight we were bringing the recommendations of the Climate Action Task Force back to you and requesting direction for implementation. There are several other staff members here tonight that are available to help me answer any questions that you might have.
Next slide, please.
So, I will start out with a brief background on the climate resolution. And then I'll go into the Climate Action Task Force and provide an overview of the city's greenhouse gas emissions. And then I'll go over the feedback that we received from the advisory boards on the recommendations of the Climate Action Task Force, and then I'll open it up for questions and discussion. And then as Council for direction on which recommendations you would like to move forward, and the proposed next steps. Next slide, please. So in October 2019, Council passed a resolution declaring a climate emergency and convened a group of community members that are subject matter experts to put together a report with recommendations on how to address the climate crisis. This group was called the Climate Action Task Force. from an operational perspective, staff had been working to put together a group of frontline community members in order to evaluate the impacts on the community of the city's transition to 100% renewable energy. This group was called the just transition plan committee. And their role was expanded to evaluate community impacts from other climate recommendations after the resolution was passed, and this was specifically called out in the resolution.
Next slide, please.
Before we get into the recommendations of the Climate Action Task Force, I wanted to show you this diagram Months 2019 greenhouse gas emissions, which did not change significantly from the 2016 greenhouse gas inventory. And we'll be presenting this information to Council in greater detail this fall. But I wanted to provide it for context for tonight's discussion. So as you can see, the greatest contribution in greenhouse gas emissions is from the generation of electricity. So this includes commercial, residential, and the additional equity share. So the additional equity share is long months portion of the emissions that's associated with the excess electricity that's generated by Platte River Power Authority. The next biggest contribution comes from natural gas, which is divided into residential and commercial, and then that's followed by contributions from the transportation sector. So you can see that it's important to focus on the transition to 100% renewable electricity as well as building energy in the form of natural gas and then transportation.
So the climate action taskforce identified 27 recommendations that fall into these six topic areas. And equity was identified as a critical component in all of the recommendations. The just transition plan committee developed recommendations on an equity assessment that could be used as a checklist for each of these recommendations. Staff presented the Climate Action Task Force and the dust transition plan committee recommendations to Council on June 30, and July seven. So tonight, we're requesting direction from Council on how to move forward with the implementation of these recommendations. And specifically, we're asking Council which recommendations you would like to move forward. We're also requesting direction on staff's proposed next steps
So at the July 7 meeting, council directed staff to take the recommendations to the relevant advisory boards to get their feedback and bring it back to Council for further discussion.
So I recognize that this is small, and I don't expect you to read this slide, but I want to point out that it's in your packet attachment B. And I will be referencing this in future slides, but it will be at a larger scale. So this lists all the recommendations of the Climate Action Task Force, and provides a summary of the board comments and how the board voted on each of the recommendations. All of the climate action recommendations were presented to the transportation advisory board, the sustainability board, the parks board, water board, and the Longmont downtown Development Authority. But the boards only provided feedback on the areas that fell with In their purview. The sustainability board voted on all 27 recommendations. Some council members also provided feedback on specific recommendations after the July 7 meeting. And these comments are all in your packet along with more detailed comments from the board's.
The board's were generally supportive of the Climate Action Task Force recommendations. However, there were several recommendations that board members felt needed further analysis. And I'm going to go through each of these in greater detail in the next few slides. And I'm also going to highlight some projects or efforts that are currently underway that are related to these climate action recommendations. Next slide, please. So the first area that had significant comments was in the area of water conservation. And this recommendation was for a 35 to 40% reduction in work water use. So I want to point out in the column where it shows numbers, the numbers that are shown as board input. It are listed as approved as is approved with noted considerations and do not approve. So for example, on this recommendation, the sustainability advisory board voted with one person approving it as is three approving it with noted considerations and nobody voted to not approve it. So while all the boards were supportive of water conservation, the sustainability board, Parks board and water board thought this recommendation is arbitrary and unachievable, and they wanted more analysis. The water board voted to reject this recommendation. They thought it was unattainable without having extreme impacts to Longmont residents, and they thought this level of conservation is not necessary given the city's raw water system. The transportation advisory board voted to support it. But similar to the parks board and the sustainability board, they had concerns about how it would affect landscaping.
So city staff continue to look at opportunities to evaluate water conservation. The city is currently involved in a water conservation projects that will be evaluating the conversion of bluegrass to wheat grass. This project is partially funded by northern water. You could see in the slide that image on your left is the service center. And on your right is an area that's adjacent to Overstreet between Mountain View and swell. And these photos are taken before the area was seeded with the wheatgrass, so it's before photos. And this project is estimated to reduce water use by about 50%.
Next slide please.
The next day have significant comments or in the area of building energy use. And there are two recommendations in this area. And the concern was around electrification. So the first recommendation was a modification to the building code to add electric heaters and electric hot water heaters. And the concerns were from the sustainability board and they were related to cost and equity.
The next recommendation was to create a committee to evaluate electrification. And the sustainability board had similar concerns about costs and equity, and thought it would be better to focus on this when we're closer to our goal of 100% renewable electricity. There was some confusion about this recommendation with community members. I thought this was mandating complete electrification within the 18 month period, but it is just developing a plan within that period. So work is already on With LPC to evaluate electrification Next slide. LPC is currently working with Habitat for Humanity on a grid interactive demonstration project on 10 new all electric homes and this project will allow for monitoring the use of home appliances such as hot water heaters and electric heat, and that'll help LPC understand opportunities for optimizing the grid, as well as the cost impacts of having all electric appliances.
The next two recommendations are in the area of land use. This recommendation suggests changing the code to allow for residential agriculture. And this was reviewed by the sustainability board and the parks board. And while they were both supportive of local food production, they question the overall purpose and intent of this recommendation. Thank you noted that while everyone growing their own food is a nice idea, it would take a lot of gardening and water to be the household and thought that it was better to support local farms.
The last recommendation that had significant comments was to implement a pay to park in the downtown, and this was to encourage alternate modes of transportation. And this was reviewed by the sustainability board the Transportation Board, and the Longmont downtown Development Authority. The sustainability board voted to reject this recommendation because they thought it would have a negative impact on downtown businesses. The Transportation Board supported the goal but thought it was better to wait until after businesses have recovered from COVID. And the ltda also indicated that they would support this goal once businesses have recovered. From COVID and once there's a more robust multimodal system transportation system providing access to downtown.
This summer in an effort to provide outdoor seating for downtown restaurants, one lane to Main Street was closed in each direction in the downtown area. And this could also serve as an opportunity to evaluate impacts on traffic, which could help inform decisions around multimodal improvements such as bike lanes and dedicated bus lanes.
So following the July 7 council meeting, some council members provided written comments to SAF regarding the implementation of the Climate Action Task Force recommendations. Those council members had expressed support of incorporating the approved recommendations into envision long months and the sustainability plan and of the sustainability The board having oversight of the implementation of these recommendations, the projects and programs being incorporated into the work plans of the appropriate workgroup within the city. council members were also supportive of ad hoc committee supporting staff of these efforts and thought that quarterly or even semi annual reports back to council would be appropriate. Some council members did have concerns about specific recommendations and had differing opinions about the public engagement process and the continued role of the Climate Action Task Force and the Justice transition plan committee.
So at this point, next slide.
Um, I would like to open this up.
Did we lose the presentation?
There we go. At this point, I would like to open it up for questions and discussion, and then ask for Council's direction on which route recommendations you would like to move forward. And then once we have direction on the recommendations, I would like to present a slide on staffs proposed next steps and get your feedback on that. Next slide, please. So this is a list of all of the recommendations. And I just want to open it up for discussion and questions and get direction on which recommendations you would like to move forward. All right, I
guess the before I call on people are there. Specifically, is there any recommendation that people would not like to have
thank you. Mayor Begley on the water conservation recommendation is Liz was assembled with no quantitative research or supporting data behind it and the engineering ends of the advisory boards all pretty much said it's draconian and not implementable and would impose incredible hardship on the city. So I don't think anybody thinks it should be implemented as written. The other thing is that having sat on the water Advisory Board and the windy gap committee, I am aware that Longmont is has the best what raw water system is best provisioned for a level weathering droughts and for making making incremental gains in water conservation of any city on the Front Range. And I think that a need case for subjecting the public to hardships other than the ones that are recommended in some of the other recommendations that didn't get called into Question would have to be made based on new data about climate movement or something in the area. So, you know, really we have a pretty aggressive water conservation plan in place. And I would prefer leaving well enough alone on that one. The other thing I would like to say is that on beneficial electrification, I'm not sure whether it was the task force itself or whether it was the reviewers of the task force. But I don't think there was ever any intention of implementing
existing use of natural gas until until much later in the conversion to renewable energy in terms of the our electric supply So what we would like to do is disincentivize, the installation of new natural gas appliances now by subsidizing you know, finding ways to subsidize the installation of electric appliances as they are replaced out. And so that so that it's not such a shock when sometime around anyhow 2028 We have to stop using natural gas because we can't afford to do it anymore. So there is in the renewable energy recommendation timeline for weaning the city off of fossil fuels, and I suspect that using using that timeline rather than then pulling the rug out from under Natural Gas now would be better received by the sustainability advisory board, which I think is it's ironic that they were the most conservative in terms of, of greenhouse gas reduction measures of any of the advisory boards. But anyway, I think that that timeline should be reexamined? Because I think from an equity standpoint, they would be satisfied by that, that, that serious beneficial electrification doesn't come along until the second half of the decade.
All right, thanks.
Kids. Were Christiansen.
All right. Okay.
So Annie and well, thank you Councilwoman Martin again, for taking the lead on this. This is really an incredible amount of work that people put in 156 pages. Annie, thank you. I know that you sent out a way to comment on this for city council. Somehow I missed that. And I would very much like to comment on almost every one of these, but I'm not going to do that tonight. Thank you. So I'll just be, but I do thank Councilman Peck and Martin and waters for doing that and in good duties.
I in general, though, I think
applaud everything in education and outreach. I believe Councilman Martin said it's really just preaching to the choir, but nevertheless preaching to the choir is important to us. Particularly if they're in school and they're young and they really take this to heart and they know this is about their future. So I'm very much for all those I'm very much against everything in the land use waste and waste management, particularly the
one wacky idea that everyone should start growing their own food and selling it at the farmers market in competition with the farmers.
That's not gonna happen. And I don't know I it's not gonna help. But this schools by the way already are they already do have programs to work on learning agric about agriculture and I would encourage people to do that more. However, places where school food growing programs work best are in California where you can grow food all year long, not color Otto, where you can grow food about four months out of the year. So there's that to consider, um, the renewable energy things I think are all good. They're all fairly technical things that we really are going to have to do. We're really gonna have to do a lot of educational outreach on that. Because people don't understand it right now there is a whole group of people who think that if we install smart meters in their house, it's going to give them migraines and diabetes and cancer. And I think there's a room for a lot of education there about how we're going, what kind of strategy we need for the future of energy in this country. We can't keep doing things the way we've been doing it.
There are a lot of other comments I have, but I
Those are my general comments that I would like to be able to have a few. Any send me that thing. And even if nobody reads it all, it'll just satisfy me. But I do think there's a lot of good work. It's just that I do think that there are a lot of ideas here that are, they were discussed, but the practicality and the equity is not there, you know, it's going to cost a huge amount of money in terms of it's going to cause the builders to have to upgrade codes and have to do all sorts of things. And that's going to be passed on the people trying to buy homes. So we really need to figure out financially, how we can do this in a fair and a
gradual way. That's all.
All right, the this is Harold and Annie. I guess the question I have is I kind of feel like I'm cheating. standing at the edge of the ocean with a bucket. And I'm pretending like I'm going to be able to empty the ocean. And we're talking about the size of our bucket, the color of our bucket. We have a lot of recommendations from this group. There are seven people here who probably have all kinds of different ideas and desires, apart from the fact that we all want a clean and healthy climate.
So what do you need from us?
Oh, I think the thing that we need is
you want to forward or forward all of these into the next phase.
I think that
I've heard some of these you don't want to forward into the next phase.
you've not heard emotion, one single motion from Council and
I think, yeah, I'm just saying so my point on this is, do we forward all of them, already forward? All of them Minus where counsel doesn't want to forward. That's
so great. So my list the the list, not my list, our list our possibilities, as well, how many are there?
So it's currently 1030 at night, and unless there is somebody who is vehemently opposed to something,
I move that we forward all 27 on and
They'll sit. I'll second that. All right, Dale,
if I could add and
I think that works from the staffs perspective as well. I think we all do appreciate and understand that many of these are more challenging than others, and will take far greater analysis and work in order to move from thought and theory to implementation. So I think that's okay. Talking to staff is fine with that. And If we could just, you know, move now to sort of this next step of how we see this rolling out, so we can check with you on that, then I think we can wrap this up
for this evening.
But right, Councilmember Beck,
thank you, Mayor Bagley, um, I am going to suggest that we put transportation at the top of rolling this out and the reason I'm saying that is that we are going to have a budget process asking us if we want to fund free and local bus again, and if we are talking about paid parking on downtown Main Street, then how are we going to do that? This is not going to be a fast project, but it's going to be a money project. And the only people that are actually working on this that I can see right now is the transportation department which is tighter stay me Phil Greenwald and myself. Longmont advanced 2.0 with Morgan Smith had a subcommittee working on transportation, but he's no longer with LDP. So that is kind of in flux. I don't think that transportation is something that we can put off. It affects all of us. It affects our budget. So I would like to put that as a priority on the list.
All right, I guess well, right now there's a motion. There's a motion has been seconded.
we can go ahead and vote on the motion. And then if you would like to make an additional motion, Councilmember pack, let's go ahead and do that. So the motion is Go, go ahead. And I sorry, Annie, what were you gonna say?
I was just gonna say that there's one more slide that goes through the proposed next steps which might help inform the prioritization. What's separate.
Let's go It was quite and see the slide.
So, okay, so what we're proposing thing is that staff conduct an evaluation on all the approved recommendations and look at the costs and look at the greenhouse gas emission reductions and look at the resources that are needed and the timelines associated with each of these recommendations. We'll also look at the community and the equity impacts, using the just transition plan committee lens and then bring that back to you with a list of prioritization lists for you to review that will group these into near term, mid term and long term efforts for the council to review and approve. Okay,
all right, great. So Harold, before we vote on this, I just want to say that we will be going over the agenda at some point in your office if the question is so what's the priority going to be you guys I will kill you suggest us the priority and we will approve it. The key word that Annie just said was review and approve. Do not make a spend five hours on a Tuesday night arguing over which one of these 27 we're going to do first.
So so we're going to give you recommendations of what we can do in the short term.
You have everything. So just things we're doing now. That's just just just give us your recommendation. And then before we vote, we're current. So we've got a motion on the table. we're debating it, Dr. Waters.
Thanks Mayor Bagley. So just to be clear, the motion is to advance all of them. Yes to
direct staff to proceed with all 27 and in return with a list of priority seating means to
subject them to the scoring index. I think that that we just heard from Andy
So for whatever it's worth any I said as I was sitting in your head and seeing the slide, generating my own, what I would what I would compile as an index, impact timeline cost equity, ease of implementation matches up with yours except maybe ease of implementation. Do you have the cat? Do you have the capacity tablet, etc, etc. You know, to implement it, you have to go outside, hire new talent or whatever. And I think that's a legitimate skill score. But that's exactly what I think needs to happen, frankly. So if that's the motion, I'm going to support it. I just wanted to clarify, we're going to the next step would be subjecting them to that kind of evaluation. We get to see, however, you're going to score those how they came out, after you've scored. That's good. Thank you.
All right. So see no, all right. Councillor Martin? Are you petting your cat? Or were you just? No, it was.
I think that the I have a
an amendment to the scoring hierarchy here. Because some of these things are going to be very expensive, but they give you a huge greenhouse gas reduction, and I see Dale and Annie nodding their heads. So I would prefer free further substitution of coffee. benefit, rather than just cost because that would do that would do something that if something's really cheap, but it doesn't give us stuff, then we'd spend a lot of time on that. And on the other hand, if if is strictly go to cost, we might not advance toward 100% renewable energy, which everyone agrees is the main priority because all the other greenhouse gas reduction recommendations don't work until you've got 100% renewable energy. So with I will do I need a motion on that.
That is a there's a there's a motion on the floor. Okay. So let's we're gonna, the way I moved and seconded to proceed with all 27. Let's vote on that. So all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right. I'm sorry. The motion carries six to one with Councilmember Christiansen opposed. And as far as, as far as Marsha, go ahead and state your comment in the form of emotion, please.
Yeah, I move that we substitute
cost benefit rather than flat cost as the top priority because
you will you will.
Renewable Energy is the most expensive thing that we have, and none of the other stuff gets there, Unless Unless we convert to 100% renewable energy. So, you know, that gives us the biggest bang for greenhouse gas reductions and much of the transition is already budgeted. We expect there'll be opportunity to win grants to do some of the other work. So I just think that the that the cost part of the equation needs to be a little more subtle than that. So I move that we make that amendment. I honestly believe that the staff will arrive at an equitable formula as they begin their analysis, but I'd like to formally sanction that. All right, if
that was actually a motion to basically direct staff to follow the benefits and analysis and all 27 of those items. I will second it. Let us all in favor say aye.
Aye. Aye. Opposed
say nay. All right. The Motion carries unanimously. All right. So Harold brings back a list of priorities based on a cost benefit analysis along with the the items that Miss noble so eloquently described to us, please, Casper Martin.
Oh, one more question is that
I'd like to have a general understanding of what the staff intends to do with the ones that have serious feasibility problems. I think some of these like the gardening thing, it wasn't an everyone must, it was an everyone May, which is a whole different thing. So, you know, I'm not too worried about that one. But you know, the water one, for example, I think we need to understand that the city has the ability to, to either replace or remove something that's entirely and feasible. I
think the I think the analysis will show that as we're bringing all these components in it'll, it'll start bringing that to the forefront.
All right, okay. Thank you guys. Okay, customer back.
Thank you. I am still going to make a motion that in your cost benefit analysis that we put transportation as a one of the top priorities.
I have a second
I second it.
Okay, the There's been a motion and it's been seconded Councillor Martin? Um,
yeah. Can we prioritize decision making on transportation but not necessarily implementation, the problem being that transportation is the lowest in order of greenhouse gas reduction,
but it's also high on the cost benefit to the city.
Well, let's see what the city comes up what the staff comes up with in terms of cost benefits. So you'd get the same value out of prioritizing only the analysis and timeline.
And john I guess, I guess I'm there was a motion. I said, I don't understand the motion. Could you please help help me understand what it is you're actually saying that we should do in a perfect world Give me an example of how you would change transportation issues in order to impact climate.
I have a either a task force or a committee working with Hopefully it would be through lldp if advanced 2.0 continues to do this, but to have the sustainability of going to 100%, renewable getting as many cars off the road, charging stations, all of that, how, how are we going to implement that? And in a way that we can save money from the city, who are we we're putting in thousands of dollars every year for local free votes. Is there another way we can implement that for a cost benefit to the community, as well as eliminating greenhouse gas from,
I guess, I guess, the sorry, me Go ahead.
So I do want to bring up that. We're currently working on a transportation roadmap, equitable carbon free transportation roadmap evaluation that we're planning to bring back to Council. It's still in the works, but probably in October. November, probably closer to November. So that'll be an opportunity to talk about that piece of it. Oh, good. I did not know that. Thank you.
Well, that will that take care of your issue, john for now, and then we can reassess. Okay, Harold, something really smart. Go ahead.
I want to point out, this is an A, we go through adaptations and resilience to building it. We move through these in a chunk. We're going to farm these out, yes, in multiple departments. And so everything is going to be moving in parallel with each other. So I wanted to help answer that, too. In terms of a timing question. It's all moving at the same time.
That makes sense. Thank you, Harold.
All right. So the motion will be withdrawn, but only upon the understanding that it sounds like it's coming back anyway, in October, November. So thank you, Annie. glad you said that. All right. Let the record reflect that john Peck gave us a thumbs up. So All right, then. Let's move on to final call public divided be heard. I'm sorry Dr. Waters.
Thanks for your bag. I think we voted on an amendment on nine. Oh, you're right. You're right. We ever voted on the contract. Yes. You texted me to the contracts. Yes, I move approval of the contract as amended. Presented nine and 12 B. Thank you Dr. Waters. I'll second that. So all in favor say aye.
Aye. Aye. Opposed
say nay. All right, the contract is approved unanimously. Thank you Dr. Waters. Good catch. Right now let's move on to final call public invited to be heard. I'm sorry. Yes. Let's take a three minute break while we prepare to move on to public invited to be heard final call.
So be back in three.
All right, let's go ahead and come on back. Everybody in the list.
Anybody can call in, you
know, may or not at this moment, it's just clearing the livestream. Give us a few seconds longer, right?
Anybody? Actually Where's
She's not back.
All right. Let's wait for Susie
In this module we're waiting does anybody have a problem john fryer is calling my cell phone died. I'm sure he's gonna want to know we talked about an executive session. Does anybody have a problem
with me sharing with him the next step
in the process?
Give me a chance we'll get to All right. Let's find me. My father. I've texted I have a telephone appointment set up in the morning.
Laughter after after our calling is just second Paul. Yeah, just after every executive session, then there's two if there's a if there's a an announcement, or to be commented by the mayor, and he's gonna want to know Well, what do we decide? And we didn't decide anything, of course. But legally. Yeah, that was that's pretty much it. So if he's watching, there you go. We did. decide anything?
Are you sure he doesn't want the seven items? Because he also wrote and asked for that. He got those two seconds
to set two seconds after he and Dawn requested it. I forwarded the email.
There she is. Hey, Susie. All right, let's go ahead and move on to Marin council comments. Would anyone like to share or lightness with words of wisdom? Councillor Martin?
Thank you. I would just like to
remind everybody that there's going to be an important discussion on Thursday morning. A virtual meeting of the Board of Directors of the Platte River Power Authority, who is our electricity generation and transmission utility. They bear a great proportion although not 100% of the responsibility of getting us to 100% renewable energy. And I would like I would encourage everyone to call into that meeting PRP a.org, you can find the instructions on how to do it and just see whether you feel like PRP is as responsive as they should be in implementing the city's mandate. I'm sure that opinions will be divided about that. And I just want as many of the public as possible to see what goes down. And I would just make plans not just for this meeting, but for the one in a month as well. They're both going to be pretty critical. So everybody pay attention.
All right, anybody else? Okay, Aaron. Like council Rodriguez, thank you very badly.
So I spent the weekend down in Denver. And as you can imagine, that was an interesting experience. It's it's somewhat depressing in the sense that there was just this overwhelming feeling of anxiety and tension throughout the city. For obvious reasons I was there Saturday night downtown within a couple blocks of what happened in front of the police department quarters. And just seeing how everybody is reacting to things and how people are trying to live their lives in Denver was very interesting, because there's definitely a discernible difference between kind of the atmosphere and the collective, I guess community, you know, mindset in Longmont versus in Denver, while very different cities obviously, like it was actually a breath of a sigh of relief to get back into Longmont early earlier yesterday. I just want to let the people in Longmont know that it's largely due to how well everybody's holding up in this very difficult situation that we all find ourselves in. So I want to like I wanted to thank the residents of Longmont at this time for for being very strong and resilient and keeping a pretty positive attitude for the most part. It definitely makes a difference when when folks are out and about and dealing with each other. So I just wanted to give that observation. Thank you.
Thanks, Mary, for anybody else.
Alright, see nobody let's move on to city manager remarks.
No comments, Mayor Council.
All right, Eugene, anything?
No comments, Mayor.
All right. Can we have a motion to adjourn, please? So moved.
All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, great. Well see us same bat channel same bat time next week. All right. Later, guys. Bye.