 Good evening everybody. I think that we are ready to go. We still have some people enjoying your dinner, but that's okay. We can sleep and we'll do tasks. So this is a joint meeting of the Law and Law City Council and the Boulder County Commissioners for September 29th, 2022. Good evening everybody. We have a really full agenda. I'm assuming everybody in here, we know everybody, but let's go through a fast introduction. I'll start with commissioners and the work area room. So, Barb, do you want to start out and let us know who you are? Thank you, yes. I'm not a commissioner, but my name is Barb Halvin. I'm a county staff. Thank you. Is this a microphone? It is. Anyway, my name is Matt Jones. It's great to see everybody. I like that we get together. We don't do it alone. And bring the kids together and see what's up. It's great. Good evening. I'm going to start with this and go after me. My name is Mark Lowchwing. Boulder County Commissioner District 2. This is my district, so I'm just proud of you here along with them this evening. And I do hope you can do quick names and introductions, but I can, and then I'll move us into what we are going to do. So I just want to thank you for hosting us for this great meeting again this year. I'm Janet Peterson. I'm the Boulder County Administrator and Commissioner and ClearlyB gives her excuses. She's not able to be with us this evening, but wishes you all well and wish she could be here. Good evening, everyone. My name is Clay Long. I'm the Chief of Staff of Boulder County Commissioners. I think it started last spring, so good to meet everybody. Thank you. So how does she want to go? This mic is, there's a lot of feedback associated with this mic. It goes on. Tim Waters, I represent Ward 1 in the city council. Marcia Martin, Ward 2. Erin Rodriguez, I'm an at-large council member. Joan Peckner. Joan Peckner. Susie Lowe Bering, Ward 3. Chiquita Yabra, at-large. Harold Dominguez, City Manager. Eugene May, City Attorney. We want staff in the back to introduce themselves. None of us have Mike Duncan, Donna City Clerk. Zach Arden, Public Safety Chief for the City of Long Island. Christina Pacheco, Children Youth and Families Division Manager. Cardinal Ardeniz, Community and Neighborhood Resources. Alright, and you're going to go on local community services. Thank you. So, as I said, we have a pretty packed agenda. There are six items on it. Well, hopefully we'll get through this, but if not, if anyone has on council or commissioners, we'll have anything else that they would like to discuss tonight. Hopefully we'll have time for that. I'm going to turn the meeting now over to Commissioner Rocheby and she will run a meeting for us. It's yellow light now. What is that? It's off. Red versus yellow. It's on now. Okay. Now it's a red light instead of green light. Alrighty. Thank you, everybody. So, let's take a look at two things. What I'd like us to do, I'm going to give y'all a minute to help me do this, because we have people in the back and we have people I understand live. So, I'm not going to just talk to you all right in front of me. And I have people behind me. I'd like to use this. Just press that button. Great. Thank you. I appreciate that. So, we have put together, and for folks who may not know, we do meetings that kind of commissioners do meetings with our commissioners from around the region, from our towns and cities. And we try to keep it on an annual schedule. And we also have experienced COVID as the rest of the world has. And so, this has been great to get this going again last year, as far as meetings and opportunities to get to know each other, to hear about priorities and to listen to the work that folks are doing. What I would like to do to start us off is to give our council members and mayor an opportunity as well as us as commissioners an opportunity to just give a quick addition of your introduction about what work that you're focused on. I think it's really helpful for all of us to know where are you. So, if I have a question about a project or something I hear on the news, then I know which council person to go to and we serve ourselves. And I think it's very helpful to the public in transparency and understanding how we work in local government to have a better idea of what it is that we're all working on and doing. So, I am happy to turn it over to Commissioner Jones so that he can briefly just talk about the work that he's doing in the commissioner's office. Well, I'm trying to pass ballot measures, which is what I'm going to do. Really, that's my focus right now. The three ballot measures we are. And I continue to work on environmental issues. It's kind of my passion. Every time I see UG May, I think oil and gas, thank you for all the work you did to help the cause and the results and the accessibility. Complaints again. We're just doing it again. So, that's what I'm working on. I want to get to the agenda so we can do that. Great. Thank you. Just really quickly outside of all of the day-to-day work that we're doing and the land use trainings that we're running to and from around Boulder County, as you all know. A couple of the projects that I'm working on separately is Workforce Boulder County and that board. And we are in the month right now celebrating the future of work and what those opportunities are like for our residents around the county. I have been working on the executive advisory board, the Boulder County Beargrounds. And some of you probably know that we're in concept three. There was a significant amount of work, especially during COVID in regards to community outreach and caring about what we would like to see the Boulder County Beargrounds look like as it's structure and infrastructure opportunities for new collaboration and more users. So, that's been a great process in there. So, staff who've been helping on that. In regards to transportation, Commissioner Levy is a quite person with Dr. Codd. And I was working on Highway 119, that particular corridor last year and we continue to work on Highway 217, both ourselves but also in the future looking at the North. And what does that look like for connectivity as well as other routes, opportunities. The other one that I think is really relevant to this evening's conversation is I continue to lead the consortium of cities. And for those of you who have been on the council and also involved in work that happens around the county, a lot of those initial conversations begin at the consortium of cities with different representatives from all of the councils and in from our town and cities, the commissioner's office and also Brookfield. And we are now on a meeting last week in regards to rural wage, the regional housing partnership started at that group and some of our other ones. So, those are just a couple of the pieces. I'd love to turn it over to maybe we'll go from this side, council member Waters and then to put that that way if you'd like to share any specific projects that you're working on. Thanks. Push, there's a push button. Thanks. Commissioner, what do you mean? And commissioner Jones and the county staff. Our work doesn't kind of lay out quite the way yours does with the areas of responsibility that we have a chance to pursue both from policy and operations. But in terms of topics that I have a particular interest in where I spend time when I'm not involved on a Tuesday night, we would primarily with our early childhood work and I'm anxious to follow up on this topic tonight in this meeting. We're all involved in housing discussions and what to do about housing, et cetera, things that you see on this agenda. So, I'll pass the mic, but that's my kind of top of mind for me is what we do or not do for our youngest residents. Hi, I'm Marcia Martin. My focus is because I don't think it's really possible to tease these three topic areas apart are the clean energy transition, new urbanism and urban electrification and density, and then transit, because if you don't focus on multimodal transit in a better way than we're doing now, you can't eliminate the greenhouse gases and you can't squish the people together to put more of them in the same space. So, really all of those are so closely related that I find it difficult to think about one without focusing on all of them. Thanks. Hello. Based on my background, a lot of my work in conversations step around housing. I was a former planning and zoning commissioner for the city of Baltimore. I'm a real estate crazy by profession. So, I spent a lot of time with our planning and zoning commission as well as talking to our fellow council members about our vision as far as what it looks like is for an affordable and attainable housing. So, that's my specialty interest as it goes. Hello. I work on everything on this agenda just as I think all council knows, but specifically I am working on unhoused residents and that's a lot of work. We're hopefully going to move that needle in the near future. Also, regional and intra-city transportation. I've been having a lot of meetings about it. I work on Dr. Cog with Commissioner Levy. We have a lot of greenhouse gas goals and targets that we need to meet. So, there's a lot of discussion about how do we do that and if we can do it on a county level as well, it would be really helpful if we can collaborate. So, I'm Suzanne Elba Ferry, council member 4-3. So, some of the things that I look at priorities and things that I've been focusing on as well as it seems it's in line with a lot of what other council members are doing as well, but looking at housing for workforce housing. Folks working less people who don't make enough to get that market rate but make too much to qualify for affordable housing. So, looking at those options for our teachers, our firefighters, our police officers, all of our unknown sector employees who are kind of squeezed out of home ownership. So, looking at that piece. As well as early childhood education, I'm a third grade bilingual teacher. So, by grade. And so, looking at those opportunities for education early on as well as day care for working class people. I'm teaching a bilingual school. We have high 90s for reduced lunch. A lot of our parents have multiple jobs and having those opportunities for them to be able to continue work and have a safe place for their children. Mental health is a passion of mine and working with staff and other entities around quality mental health access for all our residents. And I've got something that is very personal to me from family standpoint. And then, the youth engagement. So, getting our youth involved. One of the projects I did with growing up older with my class was the redesign of the sugar factory. So, they got to envision what they wanted to see in that. So, finding opportunities to tie the school district into what we're doing at the local level. And zero waste, a number of our gap. We're focusing on that as well. Chiquita N'Aupro. Everything that's on this agenda, specifically, I believe we're all working on, I don't think we're probably working on both sides, but that is a concern. So, for me, our youth engagement as well, as far as our young adult youth, meaning hoping that we can have them a part of the city and also moving them into internships within the city, providing them more opportunities and hoping that if they go off to college, they'll come back to Longmont and hoping that they will also feel like they are a part of the city and we have provided them the tools and skills to go out into the real world. Also, I would say housing for sure, affordable housing and workforce, but for me, mostly those who are renting and feel like they can never, ever, ever be able to own a home in Colorado. We're creating a program for researching for programs that renters can have an opportunity to purchase a home, although it may take them five years, but they know in that fifth year they'll be able to purchase them a home with programming and hopefully, as far as accounts with their rent with their landlords. So, if we can create a program with landlords and renters, that would be awesome. I think that people would have hope and be able to generate wealth. I appreciate that from your introductions. Just looking at the agenda, there's a few topics that have already been discussed and put on this agenda, but I want to make sure that there's something else people want us to add now. We're going to try really hard to get to everything that we can, just keeping in mind that last year we had a long list and we did quite get through it, but I just want to open that up. I also want to add to this agenda. Councilor Waters. Marta, thanks for the question. Would you entertain some feedback just in the process of developing the agenda? I don't want to get this off to a negative start. I don't either. But the process of building the agenda has been disappointing to me. Okay. And if you'd like to know why, I'd like to share that. Yeah, absolutely. We were asked for agenda items from our clerk. And what's on the list? I submitted five agenda items. Three of the items I submitted are on this list. I think I'm the only council member who submitted an agenda item. So the two of the items I submitted, whoever processes the agenda that decided shouldn't go on, and I guess that's fine. That's what you're meeting. But the others that I submitted were edited. And what is troubling to me is to be asked for agenda items to submit them. It wasn't kind of random thoughts, or it wasn't thought less the way I wanted the agenda items that I submitted. For someone to edit them and publish the agenda without any inferred with who submitted this and we're going to change this. And the reason I'm concerned about it is I read a piece in a long month, that was reporting on one of the agenda items. One of the items on this agenda and it was a tweet on this interpretation of what the intent of the agenda item is. And I think because of the way it was written. So to the degree that anybody in the county is concerned about not attending other elected officials when asked to submit an agenda item, somebody might want to close the loop. If you're going to change what's submitted and let somebody know that it was changed in one. Thank you. Thank you for that. So and I'm happy to respond just from this point of, as we do with all the meetings that we, public meetings that we participate with towns and cities and other commissions from around the region. We start with here suggestions and someone else sends some suggestions. So I don't know where the, the disconnect of I submitted something very specific and it came back to something different. I will tell you that I edited because I hadn't received other ideas either. And what I was, my intent on that was to make sure that all of us could speak to a more general topic versus a very pinpoint specific. But I didn't know that they were your ideas. I didn't know whose ideas they were and I didn't go back to Councilman but instead allowed my staff who are super professionals and yours too. And I can say that because I worked for the City of Long Island as well. So what I'm hearing is that we need to have a potential process. It's a process. Yeah, I just think at this level, if asked, you know, it's going to be changed and somebody deserves the courtesy of being told, hey, we're modifying what you submitted for these reasons. It's more understandable, you know, it's more generic, it's more engaging or whatever. That was the disappointment. I said, what am I going to do in my work without talking to you about it? As an adult, that's never happened to me. Thank you. Yeah, I appreciate that feedback and we'll talk about how it's a process piece. We can make sure everybody understands what that process is. Any other feedback about having that for Agenda or just additions to the Agenda so we can keep our Facebook forward? Thank you, Margie, for asking that. These really aren't maybe not discussion topics or I would just like to bring up at some point my concerns about the House Bill 1303, 211303, Quinn, CDOT, and the county has contracts for any project that uses CMIT and a processing of that. Okay. 1303, CDOT contract, is that sufficient for a topic on this list right now? Perfect, yes. Any additions to the Agenda? The other one that I have is I would just like to make a statement also for future conversations perhaps about our consolidated entry and maybe we need to look at that again and see if it needs to be updated. Consolidated entry? Thank you. Thank you. Any other additions to the Agenda? So, okay. I do. Thank you. You know, and I'm sorry I didn't put this in earlier but it really didn't come to the forefront of my mind until I started having conversations with our public safety department and looking at some of, you know, because we're trying to be proactive. Diversion, restorative justice. Those avenues that help bring people to the right, you know, taking the right path. However, because of a lot of state laws, I know this is out of our realm but if we can kind of work together to lobby, to look at, to revamp evaluate some of the legislation that has passed that has negatively impacted our capacity to keep our community safe. So the topic is legislation that has passed? Legislation on, I'm sorry. Oh, just, you know, legislation on, I guess, criminal justice. Legislation at the state level. At the state level. Okay. Any other suggestions or topics that we didn't get to prior to this meeting? Okay, I think that's it. Great. And like I said, we're trying to do this. I do want to just a clarification because I'm never here on the agenda that has public comment. Is there a public comment period that we need to be allocating time for? The public comment. We didn't have public comment last year of the meeting, so I just want to kind of make sure we keep on time. And that has been a subject of discussion with our staff and that we were trying to figure out how to do this. Public comment will only come at the end of the meeting if we have time. And that was why we had a sign-up list but it won't be a comment on, it won't be testifying or anything is just if they would have a question of one of us. But that would be at the end of the meeting. The first thing we need to do is get through our agenda. I would prefer that if we're going to offer public comment that we allocate time for public comment. Certainly for folks who are here, if you've come here and you're ready to speak then I think we need to honor that. Is there any strong objections to allowing folks to, if it's been announced in public comment? I had told a couple of people that called me that it would be at the end. So... There's five people hearing on the list so I think we need to accommodate but is yours a two-minute or a three-minute public comment? Three minutes. Three minutes. So it sounds like 15 minutes of public comment? Okay. So can I get a thank you for it? I really appreciate that. So that we can allow those folks to participate in this meeting. Do you have a list? I have a list. I don't have a list but we've got my people on there and we'll work through that. Okay, great game. Thank you everybody. Let's get going here on our agenda. So the topic, the initial topic here is what Councilmember Waters we already alluded to in regards to child care and early learning in Boulder County. What's here is scale of challenge and ideas for response. So I would love to have you order that because that was one of your suggestions and then let's have some discussion. Who was the wording initially? There was a reason for it. Child care and early learning in Boulder County and in the similar problem scale of our challenge, options for response and commissioner preferences. And if I were to start the last part of that, I'm making an assumption and some of it based on conversations you and I have that the county faces the same challenges that the city does in every employer in Boulder County. When it comes to staff having access to accessible quality, reliable child care. So if I put with that the fact that we have a coalition in Longmont that's been working for a couple of years and you're you know, deeply familiar with this with the coalition and have been a contributor. The scope of the potential proposal of that group they come is would extend beyond the city limits of Longmont. This is really a group that's taking a broader look at the scale of the need and what are the options for responding to that scale. And I will tell you we have a retreat coming up this is a group that's seriously deeply involved in discussion about what the options are and as you know one of those may be a proposal to the commissioners to put on the ballot the question about creation of the special district. If that happens it's really important for that group to understand whether or not from a commissioner perspective proposing something that would give the county a chance as an entity as an organization a chance to be part of the solution. Right? So it's something that would meaning map onto this the balance of both school districts in the county which is now all the way forward probably part of five or six more counties or that's a heavy lift or is that should we just mind our own business and stay focused on the savory valley district if we do that it's kind of something that maps onto the savory valley school district more than more than our city limits more than Boulder County Bardswell and Lerner but it would it would not include the county and we just don't want to go forward without having a better sense of what you what you kind of you see as options and preferences that's too easy for the last part of this in terms of an approach we would think differently about it if we knew that the county and the commissioners might have either dialed into a book or a commission thank you did you want to add I would just pass it to the mic just moving the mic to the center yeah absolutely those have additions to that thanks for clarifying the reasoning of what that question was initially or the item on the agenda two things the early childhood council as you know is part of the county and has been at that table Danielle Butler her team has done a lot of work over the years to me and I was just checking with my county administrator real quick and he just said we need to have a conversation with ECC and some other folks who haven't been part of those discussions to and it probably wouldn't be initially with the commissioners but we could certainly have a conversation about who needs to be in that conversation what would be helpful to me and Commissioner Jones you're welcome to add in here on the ECC if you're interested on this particular question because I won't say we need to know if it's truly a special district question so we can have the people in that meeting as well if it's about the ARPA funding and that grant money that the commissioners did choose to allocate for and ask that came partially from that ECC group so just to define that so that we can make sure that the right people are in that room to get you further along I will tell you of the group of the coalition that it's kind of operating as the long line early childhood the thinking is much broader than the long line so it's kind of had work that started yeah that's right the intent really is to bring a proposal that would allow a child care a early childhood education to be funded as a public good so that's beyond it would be it's a great the language that we're using is like a great funding strategy as a hybrid model mixed delivery model take advantage of every dollar available but to not leave child care as in the way it exists now as a market segment it has to compete with a whole bunch of other variables it ends up being way too expensive way less reliable that it needs to be for most of our students so the only way from my perspective for the folks who have been in the discussion the way to get there is through a special district that is what is top of mind I don't know that's what will end up but I can tell you that's where the thinking is right now so just to clarify again on that it needs to be in that room understanding so let me know if I'm wrong there's some technical questions as well about what would a special district be wider and that counts out and illegal questions and financial questions obviously there's a lot involved but we don't want to waste your time or waste the time with anybody else thinking about something that either is too technical or it's too complex or that politics are just too heavy a lift to put something together like that I was just going to see if we could just agree to move that conversation forward because we have to more than one commissioner and I was agreed to allocate some staff time to act as staff and have a conversation and then I will respond to you with staff's comments okay any other additional comments the reason I'm hesitant to say yes is because it doesn't stop it's always amazing today and you guys know this let me turn this one off the other thing I learned is that the other thing is that what I also learned is that we've already done a lot of work and so I just wanted to put it in context of all the other social programs we do because we really tried to deliver good human service in all sorts of ways and this is one of them I just wanted to do that and I wanted to be productive and then we're going down that road and to Marta's point we didn't help out on the arm of money to do some of that work and we're trying to do Head Start as well and we just open another classroom and they're very useful did we get their item to pull up point number one additional? Yeah I'd like to say based on what Commissioner Jones said if arm of money has been put in one place and then there's Head Start to me that seems to highlight the need for unification of the problem and the working group for the solution the ECC is a collective impact group which should be going partway toward alignment in the sense that what collective impact does is that it aligns a number of independent organizations with one another but someone with jurisdiction or legal understanding of what's something like the special district needs to be doing it seems like there comes a point when formalization of the idea of unity needs to be done because otherwise we lose the advantage of not having agencies working with duplicative programs for at-cross purposes so you know I guess what I'm saying is it's not sufficient to say well we put money here and we put money there we need to have and we're an instrument for aligning where the money and how money is used thank you alright we'll move to our next topic reducing risks of gun and other forms of violence and I think I'll put that on I might have changed this as well you might have reworded can I read the because there's a reason for the word of the district the way it was worded in terms of beyond ordinances reducing risks of gun and other forms of violence what I didn't want to risk was inviting a conversation about ordinances and all that's associated with that because for me that's a starting place not a ending place as I what has resonated for me multiple times I wish Claire was here because as I read comments and heard comments about we need to do everything we can possibly do to reduce risks of gun violence and other forms of violence can I agree with her and we are in a different place right now than other municipalities in in a condition with respect to ordinances but that's not for me that's not the question the question is what should we be doing beyond that if ordinances are the beginning what would be the bigger initiative that only happens in Boulder County because the commissioners and other elected officials along with all the other leadership available now communities lead in together to say this is not a legal issue this is going to be a cultural change and to influence the culture we have to have all the cultural influence earners from elected officials to faith leaders to nonprofits to cultural brokers saying this is important enough for us to do together right if there's one county in America where it's possible that we can influence the culture to reduce these risks this is it let's take this on as leaders along with our roles or titles that elected officials that was the that was the that was the question and whether or not there's an appetite this is a huge issue whether or not there's an appetite I don't even know if we have the appetite what we've talked about right it's a big ask it's a heavy lift I just think it's worth doing and dramatically increases the prospects of reducing violence beyond what's happening with what's about I'll make one comment in the hand pass I don't know if you in this morning it was there was a editorial authored by something from Kansas City Star it was focused specifically on schools and all that's going on hardening schools as targets but the point the article was that's just the beginning there's so much more that has to be done to change the culture that somehow signals it's okay for people to pick up weapons and use them on one another and that's what I think is the work that's next for us as a lot of beneficials in Baltimore County and I'm just wondering where others might see thank you so thank you for the question I agree with Counselor Waters however I think that leaders need to put out a statement of who we are what we believe and where we want our city to go and to me that is making the statement of its ordinances of its rules and regulations our residents need to know what we think about what's going on but if we don't agree with the rules and laws that are made by our Supreme Court by our district courts on guns and weapons of mass destruction because that's what I feel some of these are then we need to speak up and say these laws are hampering us on the local level to contend with what's going on by not saying anything for me personally it feels as though we aren't paying attention or that we don't care so I personally think that we do need to make ordinances the ordinances are good and I want to thank the other cities in Boulder County and Boulder County for stepping up and saying this is wrong folks whether you feel you have the right to do that or not it is wrong to go out and intentionally murder people so I feel very very strong about that I think I can just share really great way of regards to this conversation which I think is what you're asking about that this is one of the topics that came to the consortium of cities over the last couple years it was in a response to community members after the March 2021 mass shooting in the city of Boulder it was a response from local electives that we all got together and responded and at council is what else and what does that require and so we began a series of meetings with those electives around the region from Edgewater to Fort Collins to have this conversation about what else could we do and where we started was with ordinances so I would love to hear responses from folks who are interested and comfortable so we asked the county and county commissioners started in June of addressing continued work that the county has done in regards to education and awareness about the concerns of been violence in our community and then moved the ordinances connected to the work that every town and government and again local committee all the electives in the room and happy to keep folks another minute to if they'd like to address it thank you I would like to say that I still contend that the passing of local ordinances was something that was an error by the general assembly because almost all of them are either now declared unconstitutional or are unenforceable at the local level when we have adjacent jurisdictions that are not going to pass local ordinances against various modes of restricting sales of firearms so I actually think that the correct response regional response for us which we happen to be the most densely populated region in the state is to kick it back up to the state legislature and say no this was a false start those little jurisdictions that are acting cannot possibly defend against the gun lobby and therefore the state needs to take on the burden of defense so that's my position and I hope that we can consider that regionally thank you and I believe most of the folks that were part of this conversation the hope is that this is our ability locally to respond to state legislation speaking of state legislation that allowed local jurisdictions with Senate Bill 256 to move local regulations forward with that hope of influencing state legislators to move state and then move to national so I agree with that everything no I think that's the opposite of what I'm saying actually I think that passing local ordinance this makes instead of requiring action at the state level needs that the localities are vulnerable to lawsuits without having they take on the responsibility of defending the lawsuit but having the ordinance in place makes a difference whatsoever so the state needs to you know the state and I believe in local control for most things right pesticides you know is a real good example of where local control can make a difference but on firearms control we're talking about people crossing jurisdictions with intention and so the state gets rid of the legal burden and the political you know heavy lift and puts it where on small jurisdictions that have no ability to respond so I think that we should push right back hard on the state level just jurisdictions and use our voices lobbyists without trying to bring our law enforcement organizations to bear thank you I do have one question so in your conversations that you had with community other elected officials were there any police officers people who are the first line of defense in those situations were they present to share you know what they see you know what you know because one of the things that you know I'll talk to our public safety chief I'll talk to other police officers because they're the ones that are right there you know they're the ones who know you know and who could give us really good insight in passing good policy you know just meaningful policy and so you know I don't want to pass an ordinance just to pass an ordinance I want it to be meaningful and I want it to make an impact otherwise you know there's no point in that you know making sure that the right people you know people who are there you know the first line of defense when the shooting first happens the person who is right in front of the shooter right after they committed these atrocities are the police officers are you know what has been the feedback from some sheriff from police officers who are out on the field I'm just curious I have not been a part of all of the meetings there's a smaller cohort of those working with every town so I can't tell you yes or no enforcement but I think what I'm hearing really in that question is back to the counselor's question about beyond ordinances I don't think the question will focus on ordinances but have a background of what we've been doing here locally as a start and so I don't know if anybody else has other ideas or it's just an ask to consider that we start maybe start that conversation I don't know I just want to make sure that we're responding to the question that really was and I think there are a lot of things on the agenda so I'm kind of keeping my pattern right and have an analogy I really don't know so I I agree that the station do more having been there having discouraged from doing more background checks magazine lists domestic violence people women's it's hard really hard to do in the county or it's far easier I didn't receive any death threats I didn't have to use this word in my car like I did when I was in the state center so I agree they should do it but the problem is the federal government is not going to have the state has a lot of difficulty with getting the make up on this state and how they like people to get it done and we need to push every level we can that's kind of where we are and it's not optimal in any case I felt this way as a state legislator doing state law when it should have been cut off universal background checks you kidding me but every year they try to overturn having those on the committee to defend it and we bring up all the people who were murdered or raped like in serious crime who did not have a that kind of kind of sense but it's not having the federal government to have some of the state government they've done more but I also think that we you know we got to push it in every level and that's why we came around to because I'm stating this thing through when we get ours and the fact is we've got channels on one of the four in court and we did the soul weapon purchase and that's the only one of the others are in fact not challenged so this the case law you can do some things you can do others and they're kind of they have race testing the things that are more aggressive basically but I think we're going to stuck in it to change the culture Tim I wish you know I don't understand it and what I've learned in being in the Legislature and the local government to do things that you can get done because it's going to be darn hard to do and that's what I'm saying so you've got to push it and if somebody has a great way of changing people's minds about weapons it's a great work hour to you kind of speak one more comment great question man about changing minds I think you've got to change hearts first before minds change and and I I admire I admire the courage that the commissioner has brought to this issue and the other municipalities have brought I'm not certain what the net will be in terms of effects my here's one of my worst fears is that a lot of money is going to get spent defending lawsuits that ultimately people are going to lose and I think about how those dollars can be used differently and the one what I keep and this probably people will go are you nuts this has no relevance but I the model for the kind of the image of this is what happened in South Africa with the truth and second reconciliation process coming out of decades of violence and oppression and the worst atrocities we can imagine those leaders conceived of a process to bring the society together and hold it together and they did there were thoughts that changed and minds that there was accountability when there was when people needed to be held accountable if they were it was also forgiveness and it's and it's probably not an equivalent but it's an example of a society that took this on and pulled it off not perfectly not serious but it does require the willingness of leaders to lean in hard and accept the challenge thank you we'll move to our next bullet point which is the question which is residential development which also was edited and I feel like it's probably a concept of water so go ahead yep it was it was edited and the this really is a question it would help me to learn more about how the commissioners view any kind of development but residential in particular outside of the municipality because as we think about when you were not to annex to bring something from the county into the city and all of the issues with respect to infrastructure and spa and all the things that we can be concerned about I know you have similar kind of concerns I just it would help me to know as we continue to acquire open space which means which we all love the open space program but less land available and if development is allowed or not in the county that would be helpful for other housing proposals that come along so it really is a question I'd like to be educated more about how you all think about development of any kind you know outside of the municipality in the county so this is a very old issue in this county back to the Juicy Ethans and the thought of the commissioners at the time was development should happen on their city services the money is limited compared to our own city we don't have a ton of authority we only do what we are allowed to do in the state last week so the only development reviews we have somebody has a legal ability to block we did one today specific house we don't do some divisions like Douglas County and the idea is always educated people who have an interest in us providing city services when we are outside of the city talking about this issue where we have limited powers we are not a city we are a county we are not designing people out of water I mean the kind of thing and it's kind of a struggle but that's that's the focus so we want you to do city services and we want to do county services we are not going to have a bunch of development outside of the cities in fact Comline specifically says we will push development to the cities so that's the policy and I appreciate them doing their part I mean even driving across county lines and see the difference and a couple of more hundred energy and I wouldn't be down so that's how the content anybody else have any questions on that topic let's move to the next item here status current and future efforts for unhoused residents fine as well thank you for your registration and fine name for this meeting seriously well you're not behold me but if I don't survive this is not unrelated to the previous item as we we're going to if indeed and I understand that the thinking I just it was helpful to hear the clarification of the history and you know the challenges the constraints that the county faces but it does raise the question then if we're going to house the house it's going to be in the municipalities and I know there was a regional before I got right before I came on this council conference and a regional strategy with some targets set and it may be that there's in the consortium city or other ways lots of progress that's been made or iterations of that going forward and I'm just out of the loop but it would be helpful to know from a county commission perspective what's your vision for where we ought to be going in terms of housing the unhoused understanding it's going to happen it's going to require cooperation share of resources and it's going to require municipalities to take this off so thanks I a couple of differences on the just on a housing topic in general one of those is it's still in county unincorporated former county is it's a regional unit and I know City of Longmont has the phenomenal review program but I use this as an example and I'm talking other reasons we have do allow we use under very specific guidelines in corporate over county that might be an agricultural tenant where an applicant has to prove that we do need a full-time ad worker to approve that additional residential unit there is a family care unit for the reasons that we know that housing needs change for families multi-generational and that applicant has to explain the real need of why somebody has to be on-site for health reasons etc and we have just looked at under the article 19 in response to Marshall Byer a disaster care unit and the portion has approved an EU in that under that scenario in phase one of a review and in phase two of that review we'll be looking at a similar similar way counted why from the corporate older county so I just want to make sure those know that because that was new news for me when I started I didn't know what those opportunities were the other pieces and you all know and I saw some of the others go around often last week the continued push from county commissioners as well as Boulder County opportunities throughout the county the consideration of what areas in our county are part of the regional housing partnership which I think is what you're referring to that came from the construction of cities that initial conversation and then that summit that work together and through the ARCA funds we just allocated another $1.5 million at least $1 million to really because we know that we need to be doing that the other piece that's continued conversation is outside of affordable housing and rental units how do we respond to our homeownership so to some of the questions or comments and introductions from both councilman and councilman daughter Mary what does that look like at the county level and that was another decision we made in the ARCA funding specific to Longmont homeownership with how to attack the humanity in the $800,000 infrastructure that will allow them to build those units here in Longmont shortly so we're looking at those projects we're looking at a TOE study of superior that could be a really phenomenal transit oriented workforce housing along the corridor affordable housing and we also know that these projects take a lot of time so just more because of this but also we're talking about how do we get that more refinanced you all probably know that there's a 40% they get to read on that particular complex here in Longmont that's a loss of units that are literally sitting big in right now and so how do we work with USDA and those guidelines that are so strict to really help this important family so these are just a quick list of projects that we can get people into opens up a unit for somebody else in a different scenario whether it's our senior housing or it's transitional housing et cetera so I also want to weigh in on this this is actually more similar to what I wanted to add to the agenda which is the Boulder County coordinated entry system which is phenomenal their vision are in kind of a different a different sea change here with with the pandemic with the inflation with everything that we're seeing more and more unhoused people the problem with housing first as the only way to get housing is that we could use transitional housing here while we build housing for the unhoused we can't seem to build it fast enough so if we could look at the coordinated entry system and maybe expand their view of to have transitional housing in order to in order to have some people for a while so they can at least work have a place to put their stuff while we are building housing for them the other thing that we're interested in is that it kind of also goes into the justice system in that in order to be able to work with our unhoused people who are not exactly good players in the community we need to have so many beds in order to put according to I think it is the ninth judicial district as well as a place for people to go in order to have regulations for them to leave your city for example to put up regulations around your parks your public public areas that they cannot be in so we kind of caught the middle right there and that is in the interest that I have so that we can actually get more control over our city with the unhoused bad players which we seem to have quite a few of that probably would go down to the last bullet point here of opioid concerns in order to give to divide the groups of people the ones that want to be housed but we don't have the housing if we put them in transition so that is something that I would like the county to think about and to have that discussion is this is this a way that we should go now in this different of paradigm that we're seeing I'm wondering if you could just so one of the the other projects I don't know the projects one of my other duties is working with the national area county commissioners and they have been over the last six months or so hearing from communities around different counties in regards to concerns about unhoused communities and one of the suggestions to clarify what you mean by transit transitional housing would be helpful because the other term that I've heard in some of those presentations which are is recovery housing so I just want to understand which housing you're talking about when you're asking for transitional housing versus housing first what was the term you just used more time to recover recovery housing I don't really see much of a difference what I am thinking of and this is again just off top of my head what I've been trying to work on is having transitional housing where wraparound services not necessarily located what we're seeing in our community is that we have a lot of services but people who do not have a place to go have to wander all over the city to get those and if you're unhoused if you're having issues chances are of wanting to go to recovery cafe to go to the hour center to find different services isn't working my vision I guess of transitional housing would be that the services would go to them rather than having our unhoused people try to figure out through the city we have great brochure that tells where they can get different services but to find them when you are carrying your clothes around it doesn't really address the problem of the scope that we're seeing it so the transitional housing in my view and this would be a discussion of course would be that those would would schedule times of the day that they would go those services would go to wherever that transitional housing is did that answer your question yeah okay so my point of view on this is I support the work staff doing with help with solutions which is a housing first approach the problem is it's a difficult problem the other problem is so I'm really supportive of staff using evidence-based approach to do the most good and that's where the coordinated interest comes in because people who are unhoused don't have other challenges they have to address being helped with and so that's the focus of this group and so I would ask that staff have that conversation about your idea and how that kind of fits and what can be done we were such a difficult thing I've been really impressed with how many people are unhoused the numbers sound low but it's because it's such a hard hard problem so anyway that's my two cents so Matt I agree with you on one just on one part of that the reason that I am thinking the other way is because we started the safe lots where some of our residents were living in their cars they were drove to work came home they had no place to shower to eat et cetera so the churches open their doors allowing them to use their bathroom facilities and then provided the meals in the evening they out of that I hope I am staying this correctly about 59 people have been housed out of that impermanent housing because they have a place to be out of the whether a place to get services while they waited for the housing to become available we also have people living on the streets who would like to be in housing and have said they want to be but they have no place to go while they are doing that I know the Boulder shelter is there but the hours don't always and they get off at 5 and they have to be in the shelter by 5 and they have to be out of there by 7.30 or whatever so that is what we've been what I have been looking at for the past 7 years is how do we how do we make that gap work so that people who really want to be housed have a place to go we know who they are we're working with them but do we just say when you're in there you can sleep you know good luck sleeping on the river until we can get enough housing for you and that's in our community that's when I want to house and bridge that gap again I think the staff should have their conversation about that that challenge there's a lot of that's I trust our staff professionals in this I trust my stuff that's true a lot of business so commissioner you're three CEOs it's going to really work and so staff doesn't work you have to provide direction if there's a problem then you step in there's problems a lot of individuals but still we have great staff and I trust them because I used to be a great staff member that is the lesson I had that Jeff wouldn't because is that people around me knew what to do and when they looked at it it's got involved sometimes it didn't go very well and so I'm going to trust the staff great now we know they know what we want to work on thank you thanks for trying on alright the two are next item here on current and future so I have been working as some of you know to get that Goofy Northwest Corridor rail project to lock out our our hope our best hope at this point is that Bluejack gives Amtrak a lot of money because they are very interested in using our Northwest Corridor to get to Denver to that means I got on the board of the front-range passenger rail district and we meet every month hopefully our very first block of funding will come in late December and then another one in March so constantly pushing that and working part on it we are to that that December 3 going to have a transportation meeting in Longmont with Andy Carcian who is the director of front-range passenger rail and I will speak to the community let you know where we are what we are doing with it we invited David Johnson who is the director of RTV as well as Eric Davidson who is our RTV director I'm sorry David Johnson is the CEO and executive director of RTV Eric Davidson is just our district representative so we should also have the study done by B&SF hopefully around late April or May of next year and that will give us some direction as well to the Northwest Mayor's and Commissioners Coalition every month we talk about transit and there is a coalition that is really important to move this forward if we don't get that money and they do not pick our alignment then I think we need to have a different discussion about we have to stop trying to do this and think it's a different way locally Councillor Martin and I are both on a connectivity group that is looking at re-examining putting out an RMP for transit companies to provide local transportation within our city that would augment what RTD is doing now with our free with our free bus service however many of the cities and I do think the county has had these conversations as well about maybe RTD needs to get out of the local transportation and concentrate on regional so those conversations I think are real and we need to have them and move forward in what we can do for our cities any absolutely any comments or suggestions are very very welcome in how we move this forward so I hope you have been I agree with you Joe we need to deliver on to our question tell you a quick story I used to do a lot of town halls when I was a state legislator used some town halls now as a kind of commission too but I did over these counties and so I was so lucky and sometimes you choose issues and sometimes issues choose you and I can't tell you almost every town hall in the district regardless where it was in these counties when are we getting our trade over and over and that's what people want but as Casey Becker told me once she was here to ask why don't we get people what they want and I think we need to pursue the federal funding I think that's the most likely path however if that doesn't happen I think the answer is giving up on rail it's saying look do we need to spot where we do the rail and the thing is the bus is cheaper to do anchor building but when you stand it up it's a lot more money it's kind of like getting your kid to save for something big and they spend it here and spend it here and they don't get the money for the big thing that's the conversation I think we should have when people are getting services and corridors and in fact and we should be thinking about putting money in here I know it's our team money and all that and applications and all that and our team needs to perform we shouldn't get them at the inch in my opinion on this it's something they have failed us on and almost every other corridor and I say every other because a couple of are complete but the trade off if there's limited money let's get the rail don't keep talking about bus rapid transit which isn't really bus rapid transit it's faster buses it's not a dedicated language bus rapid transit it's mostly and prioritize what people want and it's true I heard this in Mother too I was in the town hall from some of the bottom of this place and when they had a beer with a brand that I or six people spent around same sentiment very strong and so that's where we should be going in my opinion in people what you want when it comes to interest city transportation I absolutely agree with that when people are trained we should hold RTD accountable for that enabling the RTD to do what they have at time succeeded in doing which is providing intercity transit by taking the noise off their plates and in particular negotiating something that improves their business model by removing their failure points I don't see how that is at all in opposition to what Commissioner Jones just said the models for introsity transit which is an aspect of multi-modal transit is different than intercity transportation I say in for city so much but I can't say intercity anymore but you know our internal inside long line multi-modal plan is different and we get just as many irate and urgent requests for us to complete our bike and pedestrian network to have ridesharing services be more ubiquitous to somehow provide a way around the city that can minimize personal automobile ownership or personal automobile use without writing an RTD intracity line that is optimized for the fewest number of riders and the fewest number of vehicles because that's the wrong objective function for intro city transit right you don't want one long trip around the city and if you're at the wrong end of the line you've got to ride for 30 or 45 minutes to get from someplace that you could get to in 10 minutes by car if you have one and that means that ridership is always going to be limited to people who don't have a car and can't walk that kind of minute drive and it's never going to be a choice that people will take instead of driving a car so I really the whole point of this long story is that they are two separate problems I absolutely agree that we need to hold RTD to account in terms of true rapid transit I also think there's nothing wrong with negotiating with RTD to get them to agree to taking local transit off their plates so they can be better at giving us our damn train so I think they're two different two different things I just want to add one more thing you know the state and Dr. Cog have greenhouse gas reduction levels we are building more roads for more cars we are widening roads we are putting on extra lanes for us rather than transit even if everybody had an electric car the congestion would still be horrible we would still need more lanes more cars Amtrak has in their model electric trains electric engines so it makes more sense to me to not putting as much effort into widening I-25 but getting that train putting all of our all of our dollars all of our energy into helping getting that front-range passenger train down I-25 and not spending a lot of money on more cement more cars more get them out of there get them out of the cars and make high-speed rail so that is the other reason we want to push this is that if we are really truly interested in getting rid of greenhouse gases then we need to have fast transit that can help us get to our goals faster and cleaner a train will do that I just want to add in a couple of pieces just for context as well what else can we be doing in regards to this conversation yes I'm North West for Health yes on educating folks how to use what we have yes on addressing the final mile there's a lot of different things that we can do but I do want to make sure that folks know that the Highway 66 from Maydown over that widening section is partially funded by the County Pass and those speaking about a transportation tax extension that is coming up under November ballot and without that extension of the current tax there was no change to that that number without that we can't move forward on our multi mobile transportation we can't open up some new gateways in regards to accessibility mobility for all goals here in the county and it would really pull us back to very basic maintenance of infrastructure and just to give folks I don't think it's a surprise to say one month because you all have such great partners and it's our simple recovery but we are still working over at Sugarloaf on a road construction project that was in response to the 2013 flood we experienced in Boulder County so just for context a couple of the other pieces that might be Longmont that you mentioned that is was also in cooperation and partnership with the District Boulder County and as they did Longmont the East County Land Road comes like over the same grade creek that's also split at cost and that's a construction project that's in the planning for 2023 as far as just other partnerships that we're working on and then of course the best rapid transit that Colorado 118 Multimolar transportation project the commuter bikeway so there's a lot of other places people talk about transportation there's a picture of folks now that's already staffed transportation our department is doing a lot of work in partnership with city and their staff as well and we're talking about the regional work that the staff did there and also personally Longmont but then but then here specifically Marty you're correct and I want to thank County very much for all the input you're putting into our transportation within the city as well as within the County because without your help we couldn't do it and none of us could we need to work together so thank you very much and Matt I did make a motion to include transportation let's see in our response and support of the County Ventures because I know I was reading this a couple of weeks ago once the transportation yes yes so one A and one B okay thank you for that speaking and thank you we'll share that thank you to our staff because we all know that it's just our staff who does a lot of head and nothing so we have three more items on here one was just in regards to boy fewer and I think the regional council but then the topic on here concerns okay and my understanding that there was an ask maybe from the mayor to Commissioner maybe about what was going on with the opening of the council like I did I did you asked and so that's how we got added based on the request and my understanding also is that our city manager our city manager as I was going to go on on City Manager Harold Dominguez also participates on that and because Commissioner Levy isn't here I don't know if you want to just touch on it and so I did get can you hear me can you hear me so the city council did vote on an intergovernmental agreement where we moved our funds over there as part of that agreement I believe I got put on the rock group which is the policy oversight for the OVO conversation we had our first meeting last week last Thursday or Friday I believe and basically it was a large part of it was what I would say is an organizational meeting in terms of setting up how we were going to operate as a group they did present associated with that in the IGA there is a technical advisory group of which we do have the city law where I hasn't been on that group and that technical group has been working and looking at projects in the first year of the opioid settlement that is what we would consider to be shovel ready and ready to go now and spend those funds they gave us a list of those projects and so we're in the process now as board members of going through that list and evaluating them and then I think we'll have a more robust conversation at the next meeting which is scheduled in a couple of weeks I believe so we've got then we're all getting our sea lights under so we can understand what that looks like thank you just as a question for folks who might be listening is there an opportunity for public comment in regards to that list that you're talking about or how would community members who weren't elected to be want to now voting seat of those regional councils participate in terms of community members I know they did try to remember the agenda I know the meeting was open to the public but there wasn't necessarily any public comment period in that one I'm not sure what the agenda is structured in terms of the future items but I know that I have to go through all the list of the projects and we talked a little bit about the concept of funding a shovel ready project now this is something that I brought in a conversation and really looking at the need for treatment you know so one of the things that I'm going to be particularly interested in in terms of those projects is what really encumbers funds on going into the future and how does that impact the possibility of treatment programs and is there going to be money in the future because if we allocate a lot of dollars today for projects that are shovel ready today does that limit what we need to see and this is from our public department is really more focused on treatment in the future because that's really driving a lot of our issues and are we limiting funding available to us in the future and so that was a question I brought up in that meeting and I think that's where I'm going to be looking at it and so for our council once I can get through this I'll be able to give you a more detailed explanation Thank you for filling in with an update I want to we've got one of the additional options for topics on here but we need to get to public comment because there were five people that were on that list and I want to somebody else facilitate that how you normally would facilitate because our ending time this evening is 7.30 Dylan are you going to use some time or I'm happy in time if you'd like me to be your timer Okay so to the public we'll continue to just like we do I suppose at the 3 minutes and you're going to address and the first one on the list is I mean the current I think I just read through the list so folks know who's going to be coming out next sure so Robert Colts will be after I'm getting Steve Altschuler and Nuna and then Stan Gell Is it off? No Good evening I'm Eileen McCarran and I speak for Colorado Seasfire a statewide group dedicated to reducing gun violence and I've been in Denver but I was I'm here at the I stuck a long on resident we've been active since 2000 and we worked to repeal the preemption law which I will let you know that the preemption law was enacted in 2003 so before that time cities and counties could pass their own gun laws Longmont does not suffer the level of gun violence that the larger cities of the state do Denver, Colorado Springs and Aurora actually comprise three fifths of the gun homicides that have occurred already this year 187 nevertheless you are not a stranger to this epidemic just this August a 13-year-old boy was shot and killed in another injured near a basketball court in the drive by shooting and last year a postal worker was shot killed in the domestic violence incident there is no question that stronger gun laws mean fewer gun deaths and injuries the correlation is very strong states like Hawaii Massachusetts and Connecticut have strong gun laws and low gun death rates similarly states with large cities California and New Jersey experience low gun death rates because of their strong gun laws for example California's gun death rate is one third of that of the sparsely populated Wyoming where gun laws are second weakest in the country I'm going to talk about proposals that don't necessarily run into the ruin issue these are ones that have been used across the country so far so one of these would be the waiting periods proposal which would strongly be impacted by suicide suicide attempts by firearms are fatal of 85% of the time another is prohibiting firearms in sensitive places certainly this is hospitals, libraries and parks just to name a few but it also be valuable in places where large crowds gather like in stadium and where alcohol is served the relationship between gun violence and alcohol and drug abuse is incredibly strong the repeated incidents of shooting sometimes fatal in Denver's Lotto is quite illustrated another is requiring post particular signage to reminding people of the danger of bringing guns into their home one valuable measure is gun dealer regulations Colorado has no licensing program it could be a test case here Robert Holt we have the opportunity to speak here and actually I put down possibly I would speak to this issue of child care and early learning but I was more specifically interested in like the topics of education not so much on the the budget and the funding issues so really I don't have any comment on that thank you thank you Robert Steve Altschuler my name is Steve Altschuler I just want to start with the little saying carrot raised God grant me the courage to change the things and the wisdom to accept the things that I cannot as you can tell from my shirt I'm a strict believer in the constitution the constitution is what makes the United States what it is we may not always agree with it but it's our founding guideline I want to point out that guns are a legal issue in our constitution I think Dr. Waters he said they should be but they are a legal issue we can't help them 75% of mass shooters obtain their guns illegally there are already enough laws we just need to enforce them and not take away the rights of our citizens mass shootings stopped by police average 11 deaths per attack mass shootings stopped by a good guy with a gun average 2 deaths per attack the Supreme Court has ruled recently that states cannot have a may carry rule everyone has a right to carry this I disagree with sadly they even ruled the police have the right to carry because the constitution doesn't say that they cannot carry local cities are being fiscally irresponsible that they try to enact laws that are contrary to the Supreme Court rulings it's going to take up lots of court time and legal time and the issues have already been decided also 76% of mass shootings are in cities are in gun free zones you can look this up the shooters are not stupid they don't want to be shot back at that's why they go to schools they go to churches they go to supermarkets they go where they think there will be no guns let willing teachers be trained and armed and have schools have one door of access the key there is willing teachers now I wouldn't be a gun to everyone or anyone those people that are ready really are able to be trained supplier of police supplier of constitution as you all smart to do when you took office as far as the opioids are concerned cancel your city's sanctuary cities and quit inviting illegals and drugs into our cities when a criminal or a drug dealer is arrested prosecute them quit letting people off that's why Denver is number one in the country for gun crime because I guess it's prosecuting attorney for homeless they said they have to report part that we should consider arresting these people arresting after one there won't be two, three or four and Chicago has the most strict gun laws in the nation and the number one in deaths and murders and we all know that's hanging in this black house thank you and it is good evening my name is Dan Duna I live on Sumner Street in Longmont thank you for the opportunity to tonight for this dialogue it's been great I thank you for your comments about the need to make a stand and that it's important for us to use our voices to express our feelings about gun safety and violence reduction and that we can knit back all the life but we have to do what we can where we can when we can and so I think that's really important I have a couple of notes here so yeah and I think we're seeing a tide turning in our country about our interpretations of safe laws and creating not undoing the second amendment but reducing harm mass shootings are horrible but what we really are looking at in Colorado is the number of suicides and domestic violence deaths by guns and there are many things that we can do to help reduce those lastly I would just want to say well two of the state initiatives I think have been really helpful and we need to just continue to work on them safe storage is making a big difference and our city can continue to support safe storage appreciate the chief and public safety here has helped us with a couple of safe storage giveaways and we will continue to be doing that we have another one scheduled for veterans today and also the people figure out how to use our laws more effectively right now it's mostly law enforcement but friends and family as a city it's one of those things we can do as a community to help educate don't need new initiatives on this we just need to help people understand what the laws are and how they can use them and then finally I just want to say I think the most important thing we can do right now is find the middle ground I think we can all agree we don't want a three year old to pick up a gun and kill themselves we don't want that to happen that's family fire where it happens within a friendly situation nobody wants that child to have died suicide a 14 year old that comes home and finds an unsecured weapon those are the kinds of things that we can start really chipping away at and make a difference and change the culture over time about the use of guns and the proliferation of guns thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you good evening I'm Stan Gill from Longmont and you'll all like how pretty I'll be I have four questions for our Longmont City Council on gun violence prevention one, is there anything more important for elected officials to do than to maximize public safety other, most of the other municipalities in our county have already taken the lead on gun violence prevention Longmont must also step up two, are the leaders as the leaders of Longmont wouldn't you want to leave a legacy of doing everything possible to prevent gun violence and safeguard our children and all of our city residents three, will the city of Longmont bury its head in the sand while Longmont parents bury their children for what will it take thank you Stan so Mark Da I'll turn this back over to you is there anybody else in the public that wants to make a statement on that say no did you close your public comment okay say no I will close public comment yeah thank you we're going to be done here in five minutes thank you thank you to the public who's here and I always find it very helpful whether Delaney is hearing the business being et cetera just to hear what people are thinking and certainly what's happening specific to Longmont is important to us I just want to say thank you for hosting us thank you for the meal thank you for the dialogue and I appreciate the continued conversation as we are serving we are all public servants elected officials we are on call all the time we signed up for that we ran for office that's why we're here at these tables together I want to thank our staff because our staff did not run for office and they did not want to be here at 7.30 in the evening and they do it because they are also public servants and so I always want to make sure that we recognize everybody who is hearing houses come together so I'm not going to speak any more just want to say thank you to everybody yeah just one thing I want to thank you I think yes so Eileen it was an obvious city house and I worked with Anne Marie Jitzen who people around here know doing that work and you were in this fight early on and I was on a video reference often for these bills and you were a trooper in your perseverance it's incredible we're learning from you for Northwest Rails we can make that happen but thank you for doing all your work it was so funny when I saw you when I came in this life am I back in committee? thank you thanks for coaching me I want to thank our staff as well I know that you don't want to be here and it's late at night but thank you very much for all your work and thanks to the public for showing up and I think we are probably does anybody else want to make another statement? no? city attorney to you city manager to you we can be done here then we can cut out time thank you so much for everything thank you