 the order can we please start with a roll call you bet mayor Bagley here council member Christensen here council member doggie faring here council member Martin here council member Peck here that's a member Rodriguez here and council member waters here mayor you have a quorum all right let's go ahead and said pledge Marsha do you want to lead us please no but I will thank you I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all all right thank you council member Martin all right just a quick reminder by the chair anyone wishing to provide a public comment during first call public invited be heard that's item 7 we will or also in item under item 9 the public hearing session sessions for ordinances to be read and adopted on second reading must watch the live stream of the meeting for instructions you'll see him currently on the screen in front of you right now when the calling information is displayed on the screen like you're seeing please call the number displayed enter the message ID and when asked your participant ID just couldn't 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 4 approval of minutes to have a motion to approve the August 11th 2020 regular session minutes so moved 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 to add agenda items to feature agendas anybody all right great then let's go ahead and move on to Harold your COVID-19 update I'm sorry Polly did you wave your hand yes all right councilmember Christensen 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 that else that city council has said before or in the future and I object to that and I think this was an issue that we need to discuss the form of governance chosen by the voters of Longmont was the council manager system this has worked well for Longmont 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 or 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 council 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 and have a future discussion about that all right the second hold on the motions out of order it was two parts you want to go ahead and restate your motion polling okay so right so currently right now so it's rules the rules of procedure we are accepting motions to right 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 discuss the council rules of procedure perfect do we have a second sure I'll second that all right the motion has been moved and seconded it's now open for debate councilman martin um 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 and I guess and I guess the uh and I guess I'll weigh in the um I've been on city council now for almost nine years I was mayor for two two years all right hold on one second give me 30 seconds because I'm going to put the dog in the room because this all right sorry about that Marsha my people didn't like which had to say sorry about that no the uh so what I was going to say is I was so I've been on city council now for nine years uh three of which were his mayor and uh I would this is a rhetorical question um 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 patience and understanding that um my view isn't the right one always I listen my I 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 um even when I didn't agree with it this is the first time even though the the city council and the city charter and the city uh policies and the 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 um and everybody here knows me well enough to know that I usually do things um to prove a point the point I'm making here is that a couple of them one um 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've wanted for the last nine months in this second term as mayor um and so all I'm doing is exercising what what the what I am allowed to do um 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 uh this city council will say things stating well the mayor can't I can and so in this particular case I'm not thwarting 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 um that's it I didn't give Harold a 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 christensen mayor bagley 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 receive the information in our orientation packet and information is available on the council and manager system all over about 50 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 I don't object to most of the things that you put on that list I just want a 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 mayor and council system and nothing and I agree all I'm asking for and I will go ahead and the charter does not grant you that authority it's the rules of procedure that grant you that authority to amend and it does not give priority as councilwoman martin stated that the that the city manager has the first priority the mayor has the second priority and the council has the third priority it simply says that any that the 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 didn't 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 to 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 uh a rule city council rules and procedures allow me to so we can have a discussion we can have votes but um I will continue to exercise and it's not just me um 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 council member waters yeah I just uh just to clarify the motion the motion is to review the council rules of procedure with the intent that we would modify them potentially the um I'm sorry do I have do I have permission to answer Mayor Bagley yeah you have the floor go ahead okay thank you um the intent is to clarify um 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 I think it needs clarification because it it isn't it's it's vague and that's often a very good idea but not in this case I don't think for whatever it's worth um having having gone back and reviewed the charter and rule reviewed then rules procedure and item number seven or rule procedure number rule number seven I guess in terms of agenda preparation I think what council member Martin comment and I think that's the way it 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 personally I think it's good it's pretty clear right now I can like it or not like it um but but it 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 the motion councilor peck thank you Mayor Bagley I think um 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 uh 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 uh 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 at 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 um the other thing is that when I have a conversation with Harold um before COVID it was a weekly thing we're always talking the mayor and the city 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 of procedures it is not permitted in in mayor and council comments to raise something and and have a raise a motion and have a vote on it so we put 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 is that that's not it city manager does that and then I augment or the mayor augments or adjusts and then um and so uh and so uh and again I just pointing out again I have never ever ever abused that authority councilman martin thank you mayor bagley I just think that it's a very I mean the the thing that the may the email that the mayor sent out didn't have anything to do with the agenda he was asking for our feedback on the individual items in the email however um I think it's a bad precedent to uh say that the council has to vote on the mayor's agenda additions um uh against the language in the rules of procedure now I mean will we then decide that the council gets to vote on everything the city manager puts on the agenda too um we can ask the um 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 to keep it 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 as 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 him on the agenda as soon as possible and um 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 or Brian don't do that we really need an answer here and I listen and I also listen to my council members so if 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 hi hi I'll post say nay nay nay all right I didn't say Susie how did you vote I'm sorry I'm sorry I said nay just because at this time we have a lot going on all right so the the motion fails uh five to two with council members Christensen and Peck against all right thank you is there anything else that we'd like to do to direct the city manager um to put on a future agenda all right seeing nothing let's go ahead Harold now you can do your COVID-19 update um so I'm going to show you a couple slides real quick just to continue keeping consistent um uh data coming forward I'm not going to do as many as I normally do which uh screen are you seeing the cases by Colorado.gov okay so um Susan if you don't see it tell me because it changes our website and so now I have to go into different tabs so this is the information in terms of where we are at the state level you can see this peak that you were seeing earlier good news is we tend to be on that downward trend if you go to the state website with CDPHE one of the things I will say they've 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 screens 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 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 it was a 5.43 today or 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'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 had 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 percent the current five-day average is a 2.1 percent actually at one point late last week you got a little below two percent this is the rolling average of positive PCR tests when you see that over time so you're seeing some consistency this is when it dipped a little below two percent 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 has still been lowered it was when they were doing less than 500 tests there's a graph that I want to make sure I can find it for you all my website just went walking on me again 20 to 29 year olds continue to be the highest number of cases that we have in boulder county oh this is a graph I wanted to show 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 you know I think the you know again what's positive is that you see this you know we went back up but then we trended down again I think the thing that everybody's really watching in terms of the caseloads and this is when you look at what we have in log mod versus boulder at 846 is really what's going to happen in terms of the 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 gist and in marika's 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 where people were interacting so something everyone's watching when you look at the hospital numbers again everything seems to be in pretty good shape the ic number when you when you bring it out is is in yellow which is 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 the elective procedure still being performed um so what I wanted to say 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 Zayac and um and really and 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 and board meetings stay in the virtual format based on the caseloads 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 in to protect our neighbor the last update that I saw I just got one earlier today and I haven't seen it uh 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 um protect our neighbor so that's probably the big news that we have at this point um 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 those questions to save you all some time anybody I can't remember you log off airing so um yeah I have so with the protect our neighbor can is is it that counties can open to that level or does it have to be statewide counties or regions can open can can make them move into protect our neighbor but and there's a but the county can't do it unilaterally the county has to get emergency managers um 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 um could go together and do a regional opening if everyone met the criteria but there's a lot of people that have to sign off on it public health directors so and so forth okay so then in the case for us Lamont and St. Brain 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 conversation with Weld County um and and the school would then have to I guess make a decision do they go with this in this area and then this in this area or do they stay with the most strict and I think you know there were some of those things that Jeff talked about that was actually occurring where they were saying we're going to stay in this arena with the most strict guidelines but it is it's it's it's not by it is not by school district boundaries it's county boundaries county boundaries and not even city boundaries right okay and then so just so you know I just pulled up that so out of nine total protector neighbor metrics we have six met and three partially met the Boulder County three partially met okay and in nine total thanks that was it all right anybody else okay 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 as counselors 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 format I think you keep on our city safe anybody else from your staff are we good today we're good great right let's move on to special works and presentations proclamation doesn't you know what I just realized hold on my medication why I'm going off I just realized I didn't know how to copy of that proclamation to read the um could I get that sent to me real quick give me just one moment mayor great thank you uh 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 you haven't got that open I don't it's it's shut it locked up on me let's go ahead and do first call public invite to be heard first and then if you go ahead and mail that to me we'll pick up that when we're when we're done with first call mayor I 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 a lot of you here invited to be heard and then we'll I've got the proclamation so it 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 that's very local ferry 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 and take another two or three minutes please yeah thank you I appreciate it mayor I'm going to stop sharing my slide and then we'll wait another 30 seconds for it to disappear from the live stream sounds great 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 welcomed 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 all right it looks like the slide has left the live stream I'm ready to begin when you are mayor all right let's go ahead and start the first caller how many are how many are in the queue I'm sorry one two three four five six seven eight nine ten eleven twelve thirteen all right 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 um one two zero your phone number ends in one two zero can you unmute yourself please and state your name and address caller one two zero can you please unmute yourself there you go can you hear us okay yes I can hear you guys can hear me I'm assuming you 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 gearwood uh 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 collective and we have a few demands talking about equity in our schools so I am a teacher and uh yeah so I apologize so one of the things that we'd like to demand um is having our SROs um no longer be a part of the school community another thing that we would like is for um accurate portrayals of history to be shown in history books and um yeah those are those are the top two right now thank you is that it um okay okay sorry I found this can I can I finish two more yeah absolutely no keep going you've got time okay thank you so much so we'd also like to swiftly institute occupational training to mitigate the effects of socioeconomic disparities to which um BI's POC 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 the next caller your phone number ends in four six six four six six can you please unmute yourself caller that ends in four six six 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 next caller okay okay this is Judith Blackburn I live at 3724 Oakwood Drive in Longmont good evening council members and mayor Bailey I am one person with two topics and three minutes so I'll get right to it first topic has to do with PRPA and our uh plan IRP they call it integrated plan for moving into the future um I'm having trouble hearing myself because I I've not been able to turn off the yeah can you turn take a moment off the live stream please do this I'm sorry I don't know how it's muted so I'm going to try and hide it anyway I'm concerned about the PRPA IRP or integrated plan moving forward that um the four choices we were given on March 4th 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 um go to one of their official virtual meetings which is going to be hard to do since they're up in Fort Collins and um I noticed that their choices also included building a new fossil fuel powered electrical facility which seems to be not in keeping with our 100 renewable goal so I'm hoping that Mayor Bailey 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 plans they they came up with my second topic has to do with debt with helmings contract and my hope that you will renew it and perhaps even add a feature on it where the um some kind of alert might go out on the days when the pollution is bad enough to be dangerous 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 in 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 as like we're in all right next caller our next caller your phone number ends in five nine three five nine three I'm going to ask you to unmute there you are do you hear us hello hello do you hear me we sure can you may begin okay good evening Mayor Bagley and Longmont City Council my name is Beth Anderson and I live at 421 Gay 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 running 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 found 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 recommended expanding the ordinance in July and said 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 str 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 property places that welcome guests and encourage tourism and spending in long months 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 beef up the code with fines hearings and revocations based on 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 695 695 i'm going to ask you to unmute caller 695 there you are yeah yeah hello um thank you very much to robert cutler 1830 lombardi street in longmont good evening and thank you for letting me speak to you this evening i've 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 long month that is carbon-free and powered by renewable energy i'm very excited that longmont has committed to 100 renewable by 2030 today i want to talk to you about the kuga river power authority prpa in order to make sure the longmont meets its commitment on being 100 renewable as i expect you all well aware prpa has recently completed its integrated resource plan in order to plan for the next several decades there have been enough changes that already two of 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 unrealistic pricing and assumptions for renewable energy that makes it look unattractive 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 and that sits idle thus 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 percent of the renewable by 2030 really in that last portion is hard to obtain for these reasons i want to lobby in particular may or vaguely thank you and mr david hornbacher for really all of you to speak up strongly for prpa to run a new integrated resource plan with our new current information and output i realize that this is some work but spending some money now could save significant dollars in the future thank you very much for letting me speak in support of longmont realizing our excellent excellent commitment of 90 to 100 percent renewable by 2030 thank you very much thank you sir okay next caller our next caller your phone number ends in 876 i'm going to ask you to unmute 876 do you hear us hello hello hello can you hear me okay we sure can you may begin great my name is ermine nomir 524 flicker avenue and i too am um a mender member within that 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 pay 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 and lastly 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 um from you guys the second aspect is uh we'd like to see a downtown center for our youth and that has a houses an advisory board innovation and therapy rooms innovation center type therapy rooms maybe even some small event space um a small business type thing to help uh people transition more into innovative fields third direction or support on starting our own nonprofits 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 the larger community and by that I mean all races all ethnicities all 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 that is the way that youth look at things not so segregated as we have in the past and lastly diversity and inclusion committee within the city that is to support all the other organizations out there that has some staying power and more importantly some responsibility um and is also truly inclusive we'd like that led by youth um and very much at the forefront people of color uh and women 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 on quote demand thank you next caller our next caller your phone number ends in 932 932 I'm going to ask you to unmute hello can you hear me hello we sure can you may begin my name is Carolyn towers I'm at 1534 south coughman street good evening mayor bagley council members I'm here to again express concern regarding the traffic signal being installed at the corner of south coughman 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 um during the planning of pike roads improvement projects the city staff has not taken into account its own standards rules and guidelines with regard to noise reduction measures as I'm revealing old council meeting notes and videos council members throughout the years 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 residents who are these current residents some of these meetings we're discussing this topic while pike road was still a dirt road rainbow ridge and creek side 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 neighborhood 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 palm shops and bars there were very few restaurants and retail was nearly non-existent we moved here before long line was quote unquote cool but the city has been our home we built our family here this is where sorry this is where we raise our children and would like to see our grandchildren raised as well a lot has changed 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 pike road all residents need to be thought of putting a 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 it's not in the vein of protecting serving these residents the standards closed and guidelines are in place for a reason traffic volume 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 we cannot reach the 750 vehicles required so why is our street now on the collector street mitigation 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 implied that longmont is now awesome all right next caller our next caller your phone number ends in 3 3 2 3 3 2 i'm going to ask you to unmute yourself there you are can you hear us yes you may be good evening good evening my name is mitzi nicoletti i live at 1261 button rock drive longmont colorada 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 um i appreciate the city of longmont providing us with 24 seven air monitoring thank you thank you all right next caller the next caller i'm going to call on your phone number ends in 492 492 can you unmute yourself can you hear me i sure can you may begin all right thank you um hello thank you for having my name is asha romeo um i live at 524 flicker avenue uh longmont boulder or longmont colorado um 80504 my i have or i am part of the boulder county collective on the public safety team and i have a few um demands from us that i'd like to read firstly um right sides are policing force by reducing police responsibilities such as dealing with homelessness mental health and truancy thus giving our men in uniform a break 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 um 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 arrest all information on police use of force inside incidences must be released to public within 21 days especially all information from weapon discharge fourth 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 socioeconomic 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 mayor one two three four five left all right let's keep going the next caller your phone number ends in five four five five four five hi are you able to hear me we sure can you may begin okay good evening I hope you're all doing well my name is Alyssa Jenkins I grew up in long month I live in socto at four fifty five during the night I'm a member of the Boulder County Collective as the other people who spoke before me are um 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 um 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 hardships that have ensued due to the pandemic we are currently going through long much of peace in the system any and all evictions until the pandemic is below one transmission per person as you are all well aware 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 modern income units should be incentivized if not required in all new housing development to better reflect the needs of our community and to help make sure that we do not progress in our regard for all members of our community which can quickly be to displace it and and turn gentrification so thank you kindly for listening and for your time and what I have for you guys today thank you next caller our next caller your phone number ends in six four four six four four can you unmute yourself caller six four four you're next i'm going to go on to the next caller caller seven eight one seven eight one i'm going to ask you to unmute caller seven eight one there you are can you hear us caller seven eight one i see you're unmuted but we cannot hear you can you hear me 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 um i'm with the health and wellness department of the boulder county collective my name is erica lee i'm a longmont native and my address is five two six kim bark 80501 for the health and wellness sector i demand immediate allocation of significant covet 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 reentry initiative and restorative justice for not only current but also the projected unhoused population and youth and lastly because the quality relationships and communication are one of the key indicators of health and longevity according to the blue zone 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 thank you next caller one minute let me they just reordered on my screen caller nine seven seven you're next hello can you can you hear me we sure can thank you you may begin thank you my name is galara madingra and i'm i live at two two zero zero census straight one month the along with city council and mayor my husband and i heard about the possibility of regulating short-term rentals to second properties even though we extremely busy i decided to call in and voice my objections we just upgraded our rental property with hopes to render out for short-term tenants we already invested tons of money and our own labor the property is five minutes away from our house and we have been working on that even in ten weekends for the last year now we feel that the rug has been pulled out from under our feet what a drastic policy change bolder count 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 your boulder and would expect that you collected the numbers that drive this policy one what are specific objectives for the policy change having a quote nice and neighborhood is not a valid policy objective two what are the costs to the community specifically associated with short-term rent in parking and parties are not specific to short-term rent in these are present and rental and owned properties please verify the marginal increase if any due to short-term rent in what are current 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 what are possible unintended consequences less business for restaurants and shops in one month 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 existing policy in the time of a pandemic an economic crisis and dramatic shortages to the city budget i will not even mention racial injustice issues plague in this community if you deny people to rent out their private properties on air bnb please tell us how this is going to solve any of your objectives if you're truly representing this community please do your job and provide thoughtful policies not knee-jerk reactions remember people do one-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 635 635 there you are can you hear us hi my name is kildoal i live at 639 terry street thank you i'm calling i'm calling it to speak in favor of the charter change from 20 year to 30 year lease maximums to total no brainer to allow the city to 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-owned entities like prpa the minor change to the charter that will help long month recover from the recession i think every resident of long months should vote for this also um my congratulations to mr victor veila and miss marco moreno and the members of alchemy day 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 redo or she gets a redo our last caller is 644 can you unmute yourself and there you are sorry about that that's all right all right my name is kirsten burris i live at 1303 carolina avenue and i wanted to just encourage the council to renew dr helmick's contract um for air quality monitoring um just to protect the citizens from harmful air quality that's it thank you guys so much thank you all right thank you all right that will conclude tonight's first call public invited to be heard let's go ahead and move on to um the redo on the uh uh special reports and presentations of proclamation designating august 2020 as alchemy day the long month month in long month colorado and with us uh do we have big 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 um put his video on vic i'm gonna ask you to unmute do you see that button on your screen i'm gonna call him right now 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 day the long month in long mark colorado whereas august 14 2020 marks the 40th year anniversary of a tragic event involving two latino teams in the long walk police department that inspired the creation of alchemy day the long mark and whereas latino community leaders victor vella and martin merano founded alchemy day the long mark on november 26 1980 and began 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 alchemy day the long month is dedicated to working with diverse populations to overcome challenging social issues like immigration homelessness and unemployment and whereas alchemy day the long month community bridge builder that promotes and expands self-sufficiency for hundreds of long month community members and whereas martin merano recently retired from her position as executive director of alchemy day the long mark after four decades of service and whereas in his late 70s victor el vella a u.s. army veteran and co-founder of alchemy day the long mark continues to act as a fierce advocate for latinos and long month now therefore i brian j bagley mayor by virtue of the authority vested in me and the city council the city of long mark do hereby proclaim august 2020 is alchemy day the long month month in long mark and i encourage all residents of this great city to congratulate and recognize the incredible work and contributions to the community by alchemy day the long mark to promote and advocate for social justice and racial equality for the past 40 years signed mayor bagley do we have a big back all right maybe maybe we'll invite him to call in at public invited to be heard at the end yeah he's on the call and i told him to unmute and speak i've asked him i've tried to do that uh council member hidalgo faring and mayor they don't seem to be responding okay 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 um share your video now i'm gonna ask you to start your video oh there's vick i'm gonna ask vick to unmute can you hear me we sure can vick go ahead sorry about that okay what do you want to say i didn't hello we hear you go ahead vick can you hear me yes sir we can i apologize guys i don't know what i'm doing wrong if you can hear me you're you're okay go for it big fella go for it we can hear you you're good you're okay talk you can hear we hear you and see you go ahead vick marta would you like to begin begin to do it we we just read a proclamation marta saying that you and vick 40 years ago started el comete and that you and vick and el comete today just do so much for our community and and advocating for latino rights so uh we thank you for your service we thank vick for his service and that the proclamation was basically to recognize you vick and el comete in general and for the significant work you've done over the last four decades so mayor i have vick on the line and i'm going to put him as loud as possible okay big what do you have to say sir and uh city council and mr domingas and the city of long one i am honored for this proclamation i i i will accept this on behalf of all the other original founding members of el comete back in 1980 and all other members that joined after that if it wasn't for all for all them just wasn't mouth and eye it was a lot all of us combined to help make changes uh in the police department and i really feel so far the police department with what the changes we did has helped so far and i appreciate that and it's i've seen the good bad in the ugly of this town i was born and raised in here and of course the ugly and the hole was when those two Hispanic boys got shot but other than that uh i'm proud to be a long winner and again i'm honored and to be honest shocked i don't i don't do things like this to be recognized and it took me by surprise and shot believe me a 77 year old man like me ordinary citizen to get recognized not only from the city of long one but the state of Colorado means a heck of a lot to me and my family and may it back they appreciate everybody there for that proclamation mr bella thank you again martin do you have something to say yes yes yes yes yes thank you when i'm not just past my bed none i really want to thank you bagby and in city council members uh herald for all you've done for this community i've been glad being part of this community and and enjoying being part of the organization since the inception and i decided to retire it about month ago in the case of july but a bullet sees will always be a bullet will 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 my home that way you need help i can help you too council member it was really an honor to get the the proclamation from from you all and and the count and the state also and our our flag our flag victor got the got the united states flag and i got the colorado flag which was really an honor and grateful for my family my husband because without them you know a lot of times we can't do anything but it's always been for the for the passion and not to get recognized recognition but it's all 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 the problems that we are a community that can come and talk and and be part of and help each other because we will learn from each other we are you know we're not perfect we'll 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 very grateful for what you have done and so i'm here to stay and like we just said we're very very proud and honored to have been recognized in which a gracias gracias a timarta de verdad all right so let's go on are we doing okay let's go ahead and read through the consentage sorry councilmember date off idago farang go ahead big has one more thing to say oh big bella yes go ahead okay uh mayor and city council if anything in the service of the ward is worth them you figure 30 years like imagine how many families she has impacted through the 40 years of service that she's done through the latino community and low income families and immigrants 30 years that's a lot of years how many how many of us can see we've been on one job for 40 years and how many of us can say how many families with uh to see impacted and help that's a lot of years i just wanted to recognize her for all that mayor i appreciate that well thank you that's a that's a great point martha uh 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 you ain't going nowhere sorry but we do appreciate what you've done so far thank you say smart that all right all right let's go ahead and move on to the consent agenda uh don can you read that for us please yes i can't mayor item nine a is ordinance 2020-34 a bill for an ordinance amending section 4.16.010 of the longmont municipal code on allowable investments second reading and public hearing scheduled for september 8th 2020. 9b is resolution 2020-79 a resolution of the longmott city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of longmott and the state of colorado department of revenue for access to the department of revenue sales and use tax software. 9c is resolution 2020-80 a resolution of the longmott city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of longmott and the state of colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for COVID surveillance testing of Longmont's wastewater. 9E is Resolution 2020-81, a resolution of Longmont City Council approving a Fourth Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement between the city and Boulder County for repair and remediation from flooding. 9E is Resolution 2020-82, 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. 9EF is Resolution 2020-83, 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. 9G is Resolution 2020-84, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the Intergovernmental Agreement between the city and Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice for grant funding for BJA Fiscal Year 20 Coronavirus Emergencies Supplemental Funding Program. 9H is Resolution 2020-85, a resolution of the Longmont City Council urging Longmont citizens to vote yes on the ballot question concerning issuing up to $80 million dollars in bonds payable from the city's water utility enterprise revenues to finance water system improvements, including but not limited to the Nelson Planners 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. 9EI is Resolution 2020-86, a resolution of the Longmont City Council urging Longmont citizens to vote yes on the ballot issue approving a change to the city's charter to allow for 30-year leases of city property on the November 3, 2020 coordinated election ballot. And 9J has approved two capital improvement program amendments. All right. Do we have a motion? I will move the consent agenda as read. Councilor Waters? Yeah, Mayor Begley, thanks. Just a question. Item 8EI is, which I'm going to vote for, the resolution to encourage voters to support the charter change. Item 12, and I just had a, could you take off what the voting screen that you just put up, Susan or Don, whoever did that? So I can see my screen. Thank you. Item 10D 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 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, Mayor. Oh, Candy Crush. Sorry, sorry. So I think Councilmember Waters raises a good point. I thought about it too 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 first reading, two second reading, come back, that would make procedural sense. All right, I'm going to go ahead and pull I then. So I'll adjust my own motion for the consent agenda. Do I have a second? And H. Sorry. And H. Or no. No, no, I. The 30-year lease of property. Yeah. All right. Do we have a second on the consent agenda or we just have to move on? All right, great. It's been moved and seconded by Councilmember Waters. Or I seconded. The Councilmember Waters second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right. Paul, I didn't see your mid-lips move. Did you vote aye or nay? I vote aye. All right. So that passes unanimously. The consent agenda passes all except aye. I don't think anything's going to be that confrontational night. So let's zip 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, call in now and get in the queue and we're not going to be taking breaks. So call in now if you want to participate in the public hearings. We'll be back in five. Looks like we're all back. So let's go ahead and move on to ordinances on second reading and public hearings on the following matters. First of all, item 10A, ordinance 2020-30 and bill for an ordinance making additional appropriations for expenses and liabilities of the city of Walmart for fiscal year beginning January 1st, 2020. Are there any questions from council? All right. Seeing none, let's go ahead and open the public hearing on ordinance 2020-30. Do we have anybody in the queue, Don? 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. All right. So we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Can we have a motion please? We'll move approval of ordinance 2020-30. Second. All right. It's been moved by council member Waters, seconded by it sounds like council member Martin. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right. The motion carries unanimously. All right. 10B, ordinance 2020-31, a bill for an ordinance amending titles 4.04, 4.05 and 6.08 of the Walmart municipal code on sales and use tax, lodgers tax and retail business licenses and creating a new code section 4.04.105 for purposes of enacting the Colorado municipal league's model ordinance, model ordinance on economic nexus and regular session August 25, 2020, page 3 marketplace facilitators for self-collecting home rule municipalities as part of a statewide sales tax implication effort. Do we have a motion? It's actually no motion yet. Do we have a staff report? Don't think there is. All right. There are questions. Council member Christensen? No. Council member Christensen? No. I was just going to move that we passed ordinance 2020-31. Public hearing, yes. Yeah. We'll go ahead and have a public hearing before we vote. So who's seconded that? I'll second it. All right. It's been moved and seconded. There's nobody in the call line, but we'll go ahead and open it for public hearing. It's a little long. 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. Opposed? Say nay. All right. The motion kept passes unanimously. 10C ordinance 2020-32, a bill for an ordinance amendment in title 6.08 and a 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 2020-32. All right. I'm going to go ahead. Councilmember Peck moved it. I'm going to take your second motion. Dr. Waters is a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Say nay. All right. The motion carries unanimously. Ordinance 2020-33, section 10D, a bill for an ordinance submitting to the registered electors of the City of Longmont, Colorado. Actually, yes. A bill for an ordinance submitting to the registered electors of the City of Longmont, Colorado at a special municipal election to be held on November 3rd, 2020. An amendment to the City of Longmont home rule chartered allow for the lease of city property for up to 30 years. All in favor. So let's go ahead. Are there any questions from council? Councilmember Peck. Thank you, Mayor Bagley. My one concern about moving this to 30 years is the contract we have, I think it's with AW2 sell water to oil and gas for fracking. I am against having that be on a 30-year point. But I know that this is just to move it along. Actually, this is so, so it's not saying that all leases will be 30 years. The contract we have with AW will still expire when it's set to expire. 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 year, five years, 30 years is just the maximum. And I just wanted to put my voice out there as to why. I understand everything that you said. Thank you for clarifying. All right. Perfect. All right. Any other questions or comments from council? All right. Seeing Harold, you look like you want to say something, but I think I said what you're going to say. All right. Let's go ahead and open for public hearing. Anybody else online? No, right? That's correct, Mayor Knowles. All right. We'll go ahead and close public hearing. Can I ask for a motion, please? I'll move approval and awardage 20-20-33. I'll second that. Actually, I'll let my council member Martin second it. Moved by Dr. Waters, seconded by council member Martin. Seeing no further debate, let's go ahead and vote. All in favor, say aye. Opposed, say nay. All right. The motion passes unanimously. All right. Briefly, let's go ahead and return to item nine, aye. Resolution 2020-86, a resolution to Lomott City Council urging Lomott citizens to vote yes and the ballot issue approving to change the city's charter to allow for 30-year leases of city property on November 30, 2020 coordinated election ballot. So do we have a motion, Dr. Waters? Well, I'll move approval. All right. I'll second. All right. It's been moved by Dr. Waters, seconded by council member Martin. Council member Christensen, please. 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 without us urging them one way or the other. I find that really odd language to use when we're trying to put a ballot issue on. I don't see anybody 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, I mean, we usually need to get things done and pursuant to city charter and state law. Oftentimes, 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. Let's go ahead and vote. The motion before us is resolution 2020-86. A resolution along with city council urging along with citizens to vote yes, and the ballot issue when you're approving it will change the city's charter to allow a 30-year leases of city property on the upcoming coordinated election ballot. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Nay. All right. So the motion carries six to one with council member Christensen opposed. All right. Let's now move on to general business 12A resolution 2020-87, a resolution along with city council ordering a notice of public hearing on petition to establish the LFM business improvement district. Harold, who would you like to have present to us? That will be Tony Chacon and Tony's at the bottom or bottom of my screen. I don't know where he is on yours. Tony, go for it. I'm on mine, so. Okay. Good evening, 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 petition to create what is known as a business improvement district, which is allowed under state statute. It's also referred to as a BID, if you're familiar with that. It's being proposed for an area of the city, a parcel of land that is on Hoover street just north of Rogers road, and actually immediately to the north of Home Depot. It's currently vacant. So a little bit about the BID in terms of what's allowed or not allowed. By the way, I've covered all this information in the report, and we'd be glad to answer any questions for the report, but give you a brief review. So it is permitted by state statute. It was established as a means to improve the business environment in a particular area. The BID 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 BID is permitted in the state statutes. It's permitted under Title 31, which pertains to municipal powers and functions of cities and towns. You may ask, why 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 BIDs, 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 it is received. So we did receive all the organizational documents and operating plan and as of August 7th upon receipt of 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 8th. September 8th falls within the allowable 40-day limitation. All right. So do we have a motion for resolution 2020-87 or questions? Councilmember Peck? Oh, thank you. Just to let you know we do actually have both Carolyn White representing the outside council 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 council. Let's go ahead and have that presentation then. Great. 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. I don't know. Oh, there we go. It 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 of amongst the throughout the state and the public improvement cost average between three and four million dollars for this type of project in this one we're looking at public improvement only costs that are in excess of seven million I think more importantly because of city requirements for dedication we have 30 of the 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 in a commercial project so that that emphasizes again the inability with the increased cost also the inability to offset those increased costs with a more developed land and I think the the bottom two points are important in the current environment where with COVID and the Amazon effect that I'm sure you're aware of of online sales retail projects and especially with COVID we're seeing the 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 and 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 we're we're being told in the four to five percent range versus the private market which is nine to twelve percent 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 bid I've tried to encapsulate the the distinctions the primary one is a bid is only commercially assessed property the minute any property within the boundaries of a bid 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 less ease 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 bid is what the obligations to the bid 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 bid is specific in that every september we have to come back with a new operating plan or 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 it 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 bids 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 i appreciate 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 i've got a question can we get the uh can we pop the did you don't your presentation now yes sir okay can we pop up so i can see all council please excellent i guess the only the only thing i have is uh so first of all let me let me uh state what i'm gonna say by saying first of all i'm i am completely i'm a capitalist people who know me know i'm a capitalist i'm pro development pro growth um pro jobs pro economy um however um this particular i i i also believe that it's the city government myself especially as mayor to uh facilitate um uh things like you're proposing you know to invite business to town provide jobs and and just long want to thrive however i do also feel that we have to give people um we have to give all 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 i'm just put it out there i'm tired of dealing with this particular piece of land um 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 if it's not our responsibility to to figure out how to do a project and we i just i personally don't get paid enough to deal with this piece of land so i'm going to vote yes on this but my patience is pretty much out when it comes to this particular parcel um tony you you raised your hand um 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 tonight is that the point of tonight's meeting is to set the hearing which is actually required by state statute so what this would do a vote tonight would set the hearing on the matter and then that keeps us in compliance with state statute right again the only reason i said 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 it debate it we take time from our families and other people who need 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 crew i hope you're good because i i 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 8th for hearing if we have specific questions you want us about the project zoning anything else you want us to wait until september 8th um you can pose questions and get response tonight but it's not the official hearing on the matter the resolution before you tonight will set the official hearing with at which time all parties can also have conversation on the matter all right i'm happy to wait till september 8th but i'd appreciate that dr waters cusper peck you mayor bagley um i agree with everything that you said about about this uh piece of property but i was wondering if we could have a clarification on what the acronym bid is for people who are listening is this improvement district okay yeah that's obvious um the other thing tony um 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 probably not versed enough on that no this you know that this area is subject to significant flooding right as a result yes okay now the split flow channel is um just down it's just to the north north of rogers road so this does not encroach in that okay thank you councilman christiansen um thank you mr dextra you're a brave man this piece of land has had a sign up it's 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 a it's a an interesting piece of property on a main street which has potential for giving us some really good businesses but it i i'm sure you do know that it is a flooded area and uh 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 um it's a difficult piece of property and i i uh i um 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 dextra partner spins it's spencer fein we're a law firm we specialize in in special districts and business improvement 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 do you want to make a motion calling uh i'm sorry i'm kind of in the dark here that's somebody else do it you i'm going to do it you second it i'm going to move resolution 2020-87 a resolution along with city council ordering a notice of public hearing on petition to establish the lfm business improvement district thank you mary bagley yes i said i can't do it all right all in favor say hi hi opposed say may all right the motion carries unanimously thank you mr dextra thank you thank you appreciate it all right let's move on to the boulder air contract renewal and so i think i mean i mean correct me if i'm wrong but i think that we've talked about this a lot and i think that uh i i'm 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 i don't think there's any controversy on this point so um councilman martin well there is no controversy i believe uh on uh re-approving the contract and i understand that we did get some uh advice from the 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 uh 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 um 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're currently written can't be used to essentially eliminate academic freedom um by uh preventing some some opinions on the data or some new results from getting out of the city at all um so i would i'd like to go over those points because um i just need reassurance that that these are not going to be abused all right so i'm seeing councilmember christensen and councilmember pack but it looks like we've got enough council members to have a discussion i just remind everybody that uh 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 councils in agreement so um at least that that is my that is my guess i could be wrong if somebody doesn't want to review the contract but um looks like dr turners here uh herald is she up dr turner do you want to go ahead good evening i do have a brief presentation and yeah looks like that's coming up now i'm jane turner i'm the city of longmont's 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 4.12.080 next slide just a bit of background on the contract in march 2019 council received a presentation by dr helminer boulder air outlining a proposed air quality monitoring program council directed staff to contract boulder air services starting in april of 2019 one year later in april of 2020 the contract was extended to august 31st 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 28th staff arranged for council to hear an updated presentation from dr helminer summarizing the air quality data collected so far with the august 35 31st contract expiration coming up staff's 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 1st 2020 and expiring on the last day of 2021 this extension would simplify future budgeting and renewals by aligning it with the calendar year the contract renewal specifies that the monitoring cost for the remainder 2020 would be 116211 and the monitoring for the year 2021 would be 348 632 staff is also recommending an addendum to the existing contract the addendum 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 slide three the first statement in task three is that boulder air will provide the city with written notice of publications and or public presentations wherein the city's data will be analyzed or interpreted at least seven days prior to release of the 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 without the express written permission of the city the city's requesting notice about publications and presentations that discuss long months 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 long months data 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 slide four the next statement asks boulder 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 the 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 is 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 helmig's comments we have some knowledge about those statements that have been made and it prepares 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 unless specifically authorized in writing to speak about the city's views or positions this statement was added to clarify that boulder air has been hired to collect and analyze air quality data but is not authorized to express the city of long months views or positions in regard to the air quality data its staff's view that the positions or policies of 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 any time 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 long month now it may seem that long months air quality data is already publicly available because it can be viewed on boulder air's website but the graphs on the website are simplified representations of preliminary data and that data can't 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 boulder air includes millions of lines of data as well as significant amounts of metadata about each data point recorded boulder air in the city of longmont are in agreement that the full data set should only be a made up made available to those who are interested in serious air quality analysis so as a result scientists 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 air to transfer their large data sets 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 now with the last of the communication statements as i mentioned staff was requesting direction on the renewal of this contract so i'll turn it back over to you council all right let's go ahead of marcia and then paulie only because marcia was already asking a question that's it yeah thanks mayor bagley um can you put the slide up with the first bullet point in under task free please so i understand the reason given for wanting the seven days of notification um however i do not understand the reason why or the terms 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 of the essential points of making this investment was that the data should be free great yujin do you want to weigh on this i i understand this is kind of standard language mayor and council yujin may city attorney uh so we are just asking if he's going to be using our data the city owns the data that we be made aware of presentations in advance where these presentations as we understand it are usually scheduled uh weeks to months in advance and so um it's not dr helmick's 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 um but the intent of this project was that the information should be uh 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 long month has this problem with its air quality so we're not going to allow that to be published uh no i i can't uh i can't really uh concur with that idea and while i absolutely want to continue with dr helmick's research and for for long month to continue doing it i think that this is a change in the intent of the project and the change uh and and unwelcome change in um in the city of longmont and the people of longmont's understanding of what this project is here for we're here to take uh direction from council the data is put up on the website in near real time uh if council wants to give direction on modifying a contract term you know dr helmick has already agreed to all the terms of this contract but uh that's part of the purpose of the agenda item tonight is to get council input and to make modifications as directed well then i would like to move that uh any denial of of use of the data or any denial of a presentation has to be approved by the city council i was going to suggest if i could just interrupt um council member martin and mayor bagley um i think staff is fine with that it was never a staff's intent to deny the the use of the information frankly i would be fine removing the condition of a 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's concern about that and i believe we can make that kind of a modification to the addendum 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 oh you need a second if you're going to make that motion to i i think council member christensen was trying to second it okay if we are modifying contract language i'd like a little more specificity as so are you know is this deleting the last two sentences is the deleting the word denial um we're we're here to take direction the other computer just died um so uh i can't read it um if if uh mr adamaker is willing to remove the whole paragraph then i'm willing to remove the whole paragraph hold on we have a we have an extra i think with mayors we can't hear you so the mayor is unmuted but we're not able to hear you hear me now there we go all right because i'm like shut up everybody but there's a whole time out so the motion that's on the floor the motion that i will call on everybody's hands rates the motion that's on the floor was to instruct and direct the city man or the city attorney's office to put into the contract and eugen 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 council member martin that was my motion and i would entertain the friendly amendment to take out the council approval so 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 um i believe it was council member peck first we'll go with joan we'll go with temple okay thank you uh council councilwoman martin thank you for that that was exactly what i was going to ask but i want to go if you'll take 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 a contract that says he will not use uh 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 specificity in it as far as uh making him give give the city all of 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 yeah although although at any time pursuant to the rules of procedure councilmember correct councilmember pack or anyone can make a motion to amend and then we vote on the amendment but uh did you already say what you had to say councilmember christensen no i didn't go ahead because all i got to say was that i seconded um i i i thank councilman 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 um 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 a work for hire agreement and the only conditions under which that is allowable i believe this is still true based upon cc nvv read and playboy enterprises incorporated for the duma is that someone has one signed it and two that they meet nine qualifications none of which are applicable here in many europe places in europe or most of europe and 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 uh under um councilman martin's amendment would be able to talk and um 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 et cetera but he obviously isn't free to discuss policy city policy because that's our job in the city and i don't think he really well i don't know mr dr helmig has never contacted me so i don't know but i don't most scientists are not really interested in getting into political policy or city policy so to me this is an issue of um intellectual property in work for higher agreements which are notoriously unfair and i don't want us to participate in that so i thank councilman martin for bringing this up i do think that we all want to have uh we all want long want to stand for fair agreements as councilman peck said this is not part of the agreements with boulder and romefield which he also has so um i would still set stand up for uh councilman martin's agreement amendment and also uh councilman peck's um friendly amendment all right councillor all right councillor waters uh thanks man beg I'm going to be just on the opposite side of both the motion and the second and the comments and then for me this is a work for higher contract uh we're paying we're paying somebody a lot of money to collect and analyze our data it's the taxpayers of longmont are are purchasing the services of an expert and and I would I would take strong objection uh 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 and our confidence in the capacity of our staff that we're going to get into this level of a contract in my opinion into to manage uh to to manage I guess what we don't we don't trust about their ability to deal with with the contractor here or the contractee um this is our data there is no intellectual property that and we can debate the concept of intellectual property if he takes our data and creates 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 and 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 of longmont pay 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 a dollar 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 going to say is my concern is the reason I said what I said in the beginning this is a simple contract that the parties of I mean the city and whilst we are the city but the the guy doing the information agrees with the contract and 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 to want access to the information this is our data and uh and this is we're not we didn't set aside half million bucks to like just you know fund um some some research study that's going to champion a general cause this is for the city of longmont and it's our data and I think that it should be accessible to the public and I think it's great that 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 if we're just not going to deny its use or unless it goes to city council but we and I and I'll do deference to council member christians and this intellectual property all the time I mean I I mean people do work patents uh research um it's it's this is not a fair an unfair contract both parties agree this should be just a simple approval and move on but anyway council member martin um I actually agree with both arguments as someone who would be much richer uh if uh if uh inventors got to keep their own intellectual property regardless of who paid for having it done um the you know we have to uh 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 uh and uh 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 uh to force agencies to clean up our air so I actually believe that the data produced does belong to the city of longmont and 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 say that if the if the city has a reason to deny uh a publication or a presentation on this data then the council must approve the reasoning um and otherwise that the uh intellectual property can be released all right I'm going to 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 all in favor of calling question and 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 uh city attorney's office to alter the contract language so that the city cannot deny uh use of the data unless that denial is approved by city council is that correct council member no actually it applies it 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 layer 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 night all right the motion carries six to one with dr waters dissenting thank you guys all right let's move on to 12d board appointment to the water board to fill a recent vacancy um let's see here mayor bagley i think we skip 12c climate action ah sorry sorry let's go ahead and do d 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 mayor we got a resignation someone moving out of the city and since you just interviewed applicants uh council member martin who is liaison to the board suggested we bring back those two remaining applicants of the three you appointed one which was allison guld now to this new vacancy you have two other candidates you could appoint one was scott holwick and the other was brian foster um so council member martin thought it might make sense to just make an appointment now instead of waiting till end of the year does someone want to make a motion i move scott holwick second all right all in favor say aye aye opposed say nay all right uh the eyes have it unanimously thank you very much all right 12c climate action task force recommendations herald i believe annie nobles around her somewhere yeah mayor council um annie nobles going to start out there she is hi annie noble um this is the first before annie gets 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 but before we dug into more work um and bringing you back specific projects and what that's going to look like we wanted to get your take based on the advisory board feedback so this is we're going to chunk this and into pieces annie thank you could you start the presentation mayor bagley members of council i'm annie noble environmental services manager in public works and natural resources and i'm filling in tonight for lisa knoblock she recently had a baby um tonight we are bringing the recommendations of the climate action task force back to you and requesting direction on your implementation there are several other staff members here tonight that are available to help me answer any questions that you might have uh 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 receive 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 ask 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 um 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 front line 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 of long monk's 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 month's portion of the emissions that's associated with the excess electricity that's generated by flat 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 next slide so the climate action task force identify 27 recommendations that fall into these six topic areas an 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 just transition plan committee recommendations to council on june 30th and july 7 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 next slide 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 next slide 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'll 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 within their purview the sustainability board voted on all 27 recommendations some council members also provided feedback on specific recommendations after the july 7th meeting and these comments are all in your packet along with more detailed comments from the boards next slide the boards 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 percent reduction in water use so i want to point out in the column where it shows numbers the numbers that are shown as board input um 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 next so city staff continue to look at opportunities to evaluate water conservation um the city is currently involved in a water conservation project that will be evaluating the conversion of bluegrass conversion of bluegrass to wheatgrass this project is partially funded by northern water and you could see in the slide that um the image on your left is a service center and on your right is an area that's adjacent to hoover street between mountain view and 12 and um these photos are taken before the area was seated with the wheatgrass so it's before photos and this project is um estimated to reduce water use by about 50 percent next slide please the next set of significant comments are in the area of building energy use and there were two recommendations in this area um 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 next slide the next recommendation was to create a committee to evaluate electrification and the sustainability board had similar concerns about cost and equity and thought it would be better to focus on this when we're closer to our goal of 100 percent 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 underway 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 next slide 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 questioned the overall purpose and intent of this recommendation they noted that while everyone growing their own food is a nice idea it would take a lot of gardening and water to feed a household and thought that it was better to support local farms next slide 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 ldda also indicated 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 next slide this summer in an effort to provide outdoor seating for downtown restaurants one lane of 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 next slide so following the july 7th council meeting some council members provided written comments to saff regarding the implementation of the climate action task force recommendations those council members had expressed support of incorporating the approved recommendations into envision longmont and the sustainability plan and of the sustainability board having oversight of the implementation of these recommendations with the projects and programs being incorporated into the work plans of the appropriate work group within the city council members were also supportive of ad hoc committees supporting staff with 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 just transition plan committee so at this point next slide i would like to open this up whoop 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 recommendations you would like to move forward and then once we have direction on the recommendations i would like to present a slide on staff's 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 wanted 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 uh specifically is there any recommendation that people would not like to have included council member martin thank you mayor bagley um the water conservation recommendation is uh was was assembled with um no quantitative research or supporting data behind it and the uh engineering ends of the advisory boards um all pretty much said it's draconian and um uh not implementable and would impose incredible hardship on the city um so i don't think anybody thinks it should be implemented as written um the other thing is that having sat on the water advisory board and the windy gap committee um i am aware that longmont is has the best raw water system and is best provisioned for uh 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 um the other thing i would like to say is that on beneficial electrification i'm not sure whether it was the um 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 uh ordinances against uh um existing use of natural gas until uh until uh much later in the conversion to renewable energy in terms of of the our electric supply so what we would like to do is disincentivize the installation of new natural gas appliances now by uh subsidizing you know finding ways to subsidize the installation of electric appliances as they are replaced out um and uh so that so that it's not such a shock when sometime around 2028 we have to stop using natural gas because we can't afford to do it anymore um so uh there is in the renewable energy recommendation a timeline for weaning the city off of fossil fuels and i suspect that using using that timeline rather than than um pulling the rug out from under natural gas now would be better received by the sustainability advisory board which i think is it's it's ironic that they were the most conservative in terms of of uh greenhouse gas reduction measures of any of the advisory boards um but anyway i i think that that timeline should be re-examined because i i think from an equity standpoint uh 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 uh councilor christensen all right okay um so annie and well thank you councilwoman martin again for taking the lead on this this is a really an incredible amount of work that people put in 156 pages um 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 god so i'll just be uh but i do thank uh councilman peck and martin and uh waters for doing that and being good doobies um um i i in general though i think um i would applaud everything in education and outreach um i believe councilman martin said it's really just preaching to the choir but nevertheless preaching to the choir is important too and particularly if they're in school and they're young and they um really take this to heart and they know this is about their future so i'm very much for all of those i'm very much against everything in the land use waste and waste management particularly the uh 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 going to happen and i don't know i it's not going to help but the schools by the way already are they already do have programs to um uh work on learning uh about agriculture and i would encourage people to do that more however places where um school food growing programs work best are in california where you can grow food all year long not colorado 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 um fairly technical uh things that we really are going to have to do we're really going to 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 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 um there are a lot of other comments i have but i um those are my general comments that uh i would like to be able to have a few uh annie send me that thing and even if nobody reads it all it'll just satisfy me even but i 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 that's going to cost 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 fairer and a gradual way that's all all right the uh this is uh herald and uh annie i guess the question i have is i kind of feel like i'm 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 uh we're talking about the size of our bucket the color of our bucket we have a lot of uh recommendations uh from this group um 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 um so what do you need from us so i think the thing that we need is do you want to forward forward all of these into the next phase i think that what and i've heard some of these you don't want to forward into the next phase there's a lot of time out you've not heard a motion one single motion from council on anything yeah i'm just saying so my point on this is do we forward all of them well right forward all of them minus what council doesn't want to forward that's how we need to know so great so my my list the list not my list our list our possibilities is a lot how many are there 27 27 so it's currently 10 30 at night and uh unless there is somebody who is vehemently opposed to something um i move that we forward all 27 on and uh just proceed dale i'll second that all right dale if i could add and and um i think that works from the staff's 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 you know 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 council member peck 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 um process asking us if we want to fund free and local bus again and if we are talking about paid parking uh 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 uh department which is tiger steamy phil greenwald and myself uh long mod advanced 2.0 with morgan smith had a subcommittee working on transportation but he's no longer with ledp 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 um 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 that's been seconded um so uh we can go ahead and vote on the motion and then if you would like to make an additional motion council member peck let's go ahead and do that so the motion is go go ahead and sorry any what were you going to say i was just going to say that there's one more slide that goes through the proposed next steps which might help inform the prioritization let's go ahead let's go ahead i mean let's go ahead and see the slide so okay so what we're proposing 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 in the timelines associated with each of these recommendations and 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 herald before we vote on this i just want to say that we will be going over to gend at some point in your office and 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 keyword that annie just said was review and approve do not make us 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 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 doctor waters thanks very vaguely so just to be clear the motion is to advance all of them yes the direct staff to proceed with all 27 and and return with a list of priorities proceeding means to to to subject them to the scoring index i think or that that we just heard from annie correct um so for whatever it's worth any i i said as i was sitting here hadn't seen the slide generating my own what i would do what i would compile as an index impact timeline cost equity ease of implementation um matches up with yours except maybe ease of implementation do you have the do you have the capacity talent etc etc you know to implement or you have to go outside hire the talent or whatever and i think that's a legitimate skill would 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 scored that's good thank you all right so seeing no all right councilor martin were you petting your cat or were you just no i was i was um i i think that the that i have a an amendment to the scoring hierarchy here um 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 the substitution of cost benefit rather than just costs because um yes you know that would do that would do something that if something's really cheap but it doesn't get us stuff then we'd spend a lot of time on that um and uh on the other hand uh if if you strictly go to cost we might not advance toward a hundred percent renewable energy which everyone agrees is the main priority because all the other greenhouse gas reduction recommendations don't work until you've got a hundred percent renewable energy so with i will do i need a motion on that i move no there's a there's a there's a motion on the floor okay so let's we're gonna i moved and you seconded to proceed with all 27 let's vote on that so all in favor say aye aye opposed say may all right i'm sorry the motion carries six to one with councilmember christensen opposed um and as far as um and as far in marsha uh go ahead and state your comment in the form of emotion please yeah i move that we substitute um uh cost benefit rather than flat cost as the top priority because uh you will you will just you don't know renewable energy is the most expensive thing that we have and none of the other stuff gets there uh unless unless we convert to a hundred percent renewable energy so uh you know that gives us the biggest bang for greenhouse gas reductions and much of the transition is already budgeted um we expect there'll be opportunity to win grants to uh do some of the other work so um 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 to follow a cost benefit analysis and all 27 of those items i will second it let us thank you all in favor say aye aye aye opposed say may all right the motion carries unanimously all right so herald 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 chelsea martin one more question is that uh i'd like to have a general understanding of what the staff intends to do with the ones that have serious feasibility problems um i think some of these like the gardening thing uh it wasn't an everyone must it was an everyone may uh which is a whole different thing um so uh you know i'm not too worried about that one but uh you know the water one for example i i think we need to understand that the city has the ability to to either replace or remove something that's entirely infeasible i think the i think the analysis will show that as we're bringing all of these components in it'll it'll start bringing that to the forefront all right okay thank you guys okay councilor peck 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 seconded uh okay the there's been a motion and it's been seconded councilor 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 um the analysis and and timeline and and joan i guess i guess i'm there was a motion i i 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 come up i have a either a task force or a committee working on hopefully it would be through ledp if advanced 2.0 continues to do this but to have the sustainability uh going to 100 renewable getting as many cars off the road uh 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 uh thousands of dollars every year for local pre-bus is there another way we can implement that for a cost benefit to the community as well as uh eliminating greenhouse gas from i guess i guess the um i i'm sorry annie go ahead so i i do want to bring up that um we're currently working on a transportation roadmap but equitable carbon free transportation roadmap evaluation that we're planning to bring back to council um 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 here will that will that take care of your issue john for now and then we can reassess okay herald something really smart go ahead right i want to point out this isn't uh we go through adaptation and resilience to building it we move through these in a chunk we're going to farm these out yes the multiple departments and so everything's 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 herald 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 uh let's move on to final call public invite to be heard oh sorry dr waters thanks very bad i i i i think uh we voted on an amendment on item 12 b you're right you're right we never voted on the contract yes you texted me to the contract yes i move approval of the contract as amended presented 9 and 12 b thank you dr waters i'll second that so all in favor say i i i pose say nate all right the contract is approved unanimously thank you dr waters good catch all 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 we have anybody on the list anybody call in third q no mayor not at this moment um it's just clearing the livestream give us a few seconds longer all right comments um anybody actually where's susie she's not back all right let's wait for susie and while we're waiting does anybody have a problem john fryer's calling my cell phone i'm sure he's gonna want to know what we talked about in the executive session does anybody have a problem uh with me sharing with him the next step in the process uh give me a chance we had to all right that's fine my father i've texted i have a telephone appointment set up in the morning right um well after after after i'll call in just a second paul yeah just after every executive session the mayor's today if there's a if there's an announcement or to be commented by the mayor and uh he's gonna want to know well what do we decide and we didn't decide anything of course um but leave it and yeah that that was that's pretty much it so if he's watching there you go we didn't decide anything are you sure he doesn't want the seven items because he also wrote and asked for that uh he got those two seconds or angry two set two seconds after he and don requested it i forwarded you know okay there she is hey susie all right let's go ahead and move on to mayor and council comments would anyone like to share or enlighten us with words of wisdom council member martin thank you i would just like to um remind everybody that um there's going to be an important discussion on thursday morning um a virtual meeting of the board of directors of the plat river power authority who is our electricity generation and transmission utility um they bear a great proportion although not 100 percent of the responsibility of getting us to 100 percent renewable energy uh and i would like i would encourage everyone um to call into that meeting prpa.org you can find the instructions on how to do it um and just see whether you feel like uh prpa is as responsive as they should be in implementing the city's mandate um 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 erin try council uh mayor pro tem rodriquez thank you mayor bagley uh so i spent the weekend down in dember and uh as you can imagine that was an interesting experience um it's it was somewhat depressing in the sense that there was just this uh overwhelming feeling of anxiety and tension throughout the city for obvious reasons uh i was there saturday night downtown within a couple blocks of what happened in front of the police department headquarters and uh just seeing how everybody is reacting to things and how people are trying to live their lives in dember it was very interesting because there's definitely a discernible difference between kind of the atmosphere and the collective i guess community you know uh mindset in longmont versus in dember while very different cities obviously long it was actually a breath of a sigh of relief to get back into longmont uh earlier earlier yesterday and i just want to let the people of longmont know that it's largely and due to how well everybody's holding up in this uh very difficult situation that we all find ourselves in so i want to like i wanted to uh thank the residents of longmont at this time for for being very strong and resilient and keeping a a pretty positive attitude for the most part uh it definitely makes a difference when when folks are out and about and dealing with each other so i just wanted to uh give that observation thank you thanks mayor pro tem anybody else all right see nobody let's move on to city manager marks 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 all right opposed say nay all right great we'll see a same bat channel same bat time next week all right later guys bye