 or Pledge of Allegiance, Council Member Martin is unable to participate tonight in person due to a personal matter that requires her to be out of state. Staff is prepared for Council Member Martin to participate remotely, but first, Council must take action to follow this, so I'm going to make two motions. The first one is I move to suspend Council Rule or Procedure 25.2.8.2 to allow for Council Member Martin to participate remotely in this meeting. Thank you. It's been seconded by Councillor Waters. Let's vote. Okay. That carried unanimously. The second motion is to allow, I move to allow electronic participation by Council Member Martin through July 2022 due to a personal matter that requires her to be out of state and unable to participate in person. Okay. That has been seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez. Let's vote. That also carries unanimously, so welcome, Councillor Martin. Can we have a roll call, please, Don? Absolutely. Mayor Peck. Present. Council Member Dogelferring. Here. Council Member Martin. Here. Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez. Here. Council Member Waters. Here. Council Member Yarbrough. Here. Let's stand for the Pledge. 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. So I have a reminder to the public that this meeting can be viewed on the live stream at www.longmontcolorado.gov. Anyone wishing to speak at first call, public invited to be heard will need to add his or her name to the list outside the council chambers. Only those on the list will be invited to speak at the first public invited to be heard. Speakers who do not place their names on the list will have the opportunity to speak during public hearing items this evening or at the final call public invited to be heard on any item at the end of the meeting. Can we have approval of the June 14th minutes? Okay. The motion has been moved by Councilor Waters, seconded by Councilor Hidalgo-Ferring. Let's vote. So that carries unanimously. Thank you. We are now at the agenda revisions. Do we have any revisions, Dawn? We do not, Mayor Peck. Thank you. How about Councillors, do you have any motions to put items on future agendas? Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on to the city manager's report. No report, Mayor Counsel. Okay. Thank you. We do have a special report by Jim Golden. Mayor, members of council, I'm Jim Golden, Chief Financial Officer. So tonight we'll be presenting to you the annual Comprehensive Financial Report for 2021 and the audit report from our audit firm, Plant Moran. I'm just going to make a brief introductory comments and then I'm going to turn it over to Deanne Hansen, the accounting manager. And after Deanne goes over some of the highlights, then we will have Tim St. Andrew, who's the partner from Plant Moran in charge of our audit, he'll present the audit report to you all. So just wanted to acknowledge the work of the accounting staff in putting this together. It's almost 300-page document this year. And as you can imagine, that takes quite a lot of effort on their parts. I think if you've noticed at the end of the letter of transmittal, the city has, for its past audit for 2020's annual finance report, did receive the annual GFOA award as it has in the past, and that's all due to the efforts of Deanne and her staff. And I do want to acknowledge all of them. Tonight, along with Deanne here is Suzie McGinley, who's a lead accountant. You can both stand up, Deanne and Suzie. But some staff that are also not here today that are also involved in this are lead accountants, Sammy Coulson, and accountants, Kim Kluge, Carlin Gonzalez, and Kelly Nguyen. So with that, I'm going to say once again they did a great job, and I want to thank them for their efforts, and I'll turn it over to Deanne to present the highlights. Hello. I'm Deanne Hansen. I'm the accounting manager here for the city. I'd like to thank you for your time tonight and allowing me to present this and all your support. I'm just going to give a brief highlight of where the city stands at the end of 2021. But first, I would like to give a special thanks to Suzie McGinley and Sammy Coulson, our lead accountants, and the rest of my accounting team for the hard work that they put into this financial report and helping with the audit. It is a tremendous work effort, and I really appreciate everybody's help on it. And the city engaged Plant Moran to perform our financial audit. Tim St. Andrew and Josh Edie directed the audit and will present auditor comments and respond to any questions from council. Um, so, so the city finished 2021 with a total net position of $1.38 billion. Governmental activities making up 573 million of that and business type activities making up 809 million. That's an increase in net position of 76 million from 2020. You can see financial highlights associated with city-wide net position in the management discussion and analysis that starts on page 28 of the financial report. So more relevant information pertaining to fund balances and changes in that position of the major governmental funds can be found on page 44 and 46 of the financial report, as well as a summary of fund balances in the council communication on page four. The major enterprise funds net position and working capital information can be found on page 52 through 53 of the report and on page five of your council communication. And then just a summary of our assets held in trust for retirement benefits totaled 146.4 million at the end of the year. And this information can be found on pages 25, 225 through 226 of the financial report and page five of your council communication. So that's it for my high-end highlights of the financial statements. And if you don't have any questions, I can turn it off to our auditors, Tim St. Andrew, and then Josh Edie will be presenting information. Thank you, Jim and Deanne. Good evening, everyone. We appreciate you having us here today to present the results of the December 31st, 2021 financial statement audit. As mentioned, my name is Tim St. Andrew and with me is Josh Edie. And before I get into the audit deliverables and the audit results, I would like to take the opportunity to thank Jim and Deanne and the whole team. Overall, I would echo Jim's comments. Great team to work with, very responsive. Jim mentioned the heavy lift, the effort, the 300 page financial statements. But what he didn't mention is that this process really starts back in January and it goes right up until this meeting. So it's a five to six month process. So it's very time consuming. There is a lot of effort and we certainly appreciate your team's help throughout the whole process. So moving on to the audit results, there are a few different deliverables that you should have, one being the annual comprehensive financial report. Two would be the single audit report, which is the audit of the city's federal awards and that is included in the back of the city's financial statements. Third would be the end of audit letter addressed to the city council. To start, I'll cover the audit opinions on pages 25 and through 27 of the annual comprehensive financial report. You will find the auditor's report. That's really in this 300 page document. Those are really the only three pages that belong to us and that would be our opinion letter. So we did issue an unmodified opinion. And so what that means is that is a clean opinion. The readers can rely on the financial statements. They are materially accurate and done so in accordance with the accounting standards. We also have an emphasis of matter paragraph within the auditor's report. And this relates to the Longmont housing authority that was brought into the city's financial statements this year. But because of how the accounting rules are written, we actually had to restate the 2020 financial statements because we do have a change in reporting entity. So we had to go back and restate last year as if the housing authority were included all along. I'm starting on page 284 of the financial statements. You'll find the auditor's reports related to the single audit. Uh, we did test two major programs this year. The highway planning and construction cluster and the community development block grant disaster recovery funds. Uh, both of those were unmodified opinions as well. And we didn't note any compliance issues with the grants on page two 90 of the financial statements. You will see that we did have one finding this year and it's a, it's a material weakness surrounding the preparation of the schedule of federal expenditures. And that's really the listing of all of the, the grants received and amounts expended this year through the testing performed. We did find approximately $855,000 of prior year expenditures that were included on the initial draft received. Uh, those were removed and are not included in the final schedule. Uh, but because it was noted during the audit, we do have to communicate that to council and we've, we've talked with, with Deanne and the team and they are looking at that process and the controls to make sure they're going forward. Um, there's a better review of those schedules on the front end of the audit. So with that, I will turn it over to Josh to cover the end of audit letter. Good evening everyone. So, uh, the end of audit letter is basically the book end to the letter we would have sent previously, uh, related to the audit that basically spelled out our plan and how we were going to approach the audit. So if there were any deviations to that plan, this is where those communications would be. Uh, thankfully we do not have any significant deviations. Uh, there are a few things that we are still required to cover in this letter and so I will go over those items. Uh, on page three, there is in that second paragraph a discussion of the mortality table used for, uh, pension and wanted to note that that has been updated for the current year, but we did need to comment on that in the current, in this current report. Um, it's because the pension is always a year behind in terms of the audit. So that has now been updated to the pub 2010, which is the most recent mortality tables. Uh, two pages later, we do have the past adjustments, which are basically, um, adjustments that management and we agree are not material. So if we were to cross every T, make sure that these were in there, those would be put in, but, uh, because those are not material, those were not run through the financial statements in the current year. The last couple pages, uh, include some other information that would be valuable. I encourage you to go through that at your leisure. We will be happy to cover any questions you have on that. I would point your attention to the last page here. There is a new statement from the governing body, uh, GASB statement number 87, which relates to leases and while this won't have an economic effect on the city, what it does do is bring any leases that might not currently be on the financial statements to the balance sheet of the financial statements. And so the city is working through that. We have been in discussions with the city and we'll continue to do so to make sure that the city is in compliance for this, uh, next year when this is effective. Thank you. With that, we'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Council waters. Thanks, Mayor Peck. Um, so the only, the only material finding in this, in the audit, uh, is finding, uh, 2021 zero, zero one, which you made reference to, uh, in the way it reads is that, uh, it's, it is simply a reporting. It is a timing of the reporting of this $855,000 expenditures. That's correct. Um, and the corrective action is simply to, to, to reenter, uh, to show, to show that in 2020, as opposed to 2021, because I didn't see a specific, I saw that there, that there was an action plan. I just didn't see the specifics out now. So those actually, those would have been reported last year on the 2020 schedule of federal expenditures, but because they weren't, they were initially brought forward to the 2021 schedule. But the way that the grant regulations are written is that as long as that didn't impact major program selection last year, we actually wouldn't go back and restate last year's schedule, and they also wouldn't go on this year's schedule. This is really about moving forward in how that gets reported. Absolutely correct. The only other comment I would make is, uh, it's just been remarkable to me in having, look, this is the fourth of these audits, or fourth audit result I've looked at as a council member. Um, and given the number of funds, the complexity of our financial operations, the number of transactions that, that this would be the first, I think this is the first time I've seen anything that's considered material finding, and it's a journal entry, uh, process, I think, this is what I'm hearing, I think it's still pretty remarkable, Jim, and your staff, you know, it's, it is just amazing, your ability to, to account for every single dollar in transaction that comes to the city. Good job. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you, Jim. You're now at first, uh, call public to be, invited to be heard. I think she is going out to get the list of people who have signed up, and I think the very first person that signed up was Janice Reban, so do you want to come on up, Janice? Good evening, Mayor Peck, and council. It's nice to see everyone. I'm here as president of Longmont Sister Cities Association, and the first thing I would like to do is introduce Wolfstar Duran. She is our summer intern and a cultural broker from the Northern Arapaho Indian Reservation. So would you like to introduce yourself? Hi, my name is Wolfstar Duran. I'm from the Northern Arapaho tribe, from the Rune River Reservation in Wyoming, and I'm currently a student at the University of Wyoming, and so I'm here just to make sure both exchanges are going well, and whatever board members need help, so. Welcome, and thank you for all you're doing. So our delegation will be heading to the reservation on June 9th. They will attend Sundance, which is really exciting, and a really wonderful opportunity for us to learn a lot more about Wolfstar's culture, and so I'm going to also share some really exciting news. I got a call last week from the city of Broomfield, and what we've done here in Longmont, they've heard about, and they are replicating with the Southern Arapaho. So they have reached out to and visited the res once, and I'm going to be working with them to kind of guide them because we didn't get that. So this is really exciting news, and we hope every city along the front range does something similar. So I really wanted to share that information with you tonight. So I really thank the city of Longmont and all of the staff and council and the former mayor and our current mayor for all of the support, and we hope this is the very first seeds of change for all of us. So with that, I'm going to turn this over to our wonderful ambassadors. These are all students between eighth, and well, we have seven total going, but four of them are here tonight. So I'm going to turn it over to their chaperones and to the students. Thank you. Hello, everyone. Good evening. My name is Jenny Diaz-Leon, and my pronouns are she, her, a, yeah. I am a city of Longmont employee with the Children, Youth, and Family Division. Hello, everyone. So I am one of the chaperones that gets to go with the students to Wind River, and I just want to say thank you for this wonderful opportunity. I know that being involved in this has truly changed my life, and so I'm really hopeful that this is going to change the lives of several of our students here in Longmont, as well as the students in the Northern Arapahoe Tribe. Thank you. Hey, how's it going? My name is Patricio Hondre, and I'm Steve's Trigo, or Patricio. I am an educator with St. Brain Valley School District, and I am the other chaperone. I just want to say thank you all for your continued support of Sister Cities. This has been an exciting new chapter for us, and it is awesome to see a young group of some really amazing students go by, you know, be able to go down there. And yeah, just thank you so much, and I really look forward to, look forward to this trip coming up. Hi, I'm Estella Mendoza. I'm a student at Niwat High School, and I am really thankful for this opportunity that everyone has provided. My name is Natalie Heinze. I'm going into Niwat High School into ninth grade next year, and I'm super excited to go to the Wind River Reservation. Hi, my name is Gabriel Cardenas. I'm a student at Skyline High School. I just want to thank you guys for sending us up there. I think it's really important for us to know about different cultures, and I'm really thankful for the opportunity. Thank you. Hi, my name is Matos Rojas. I am entering ninth grade in Erie High School, and I'm really thankful for the opportunity for us to like be educated about something new. Thank you. Mayor or council, do you have any questions for our students or any advice? I think your advice is represent us well, and bring back some of your experiences. I'd love to hear about them, since this is the first group going, so it would be great. And I love your enthusiasm, Patricio. He's known for that. Thank you very much. If we could indulge you for a moment and get a picture with the group, that would be lovely, and I really appreciate your support. Thank you. Turn on my microphone. The next person we have on our list, last name, oh, it's Hazel Gordon. Come on up, Hazel. Hazel, can you turn your microphone on? Thank you. There you go. I'd like to thank you all for allowing me to make some comments today. My name is Hazel Gordon, and I'll be speaking as a concerned citizen with recycling issues, especially in terms of long-range planting ideas, and the youth we saw today helps me to get motivated. A reside at 1600 Atkinson Avenue in Longmont have been a resident for four years. I encourage the council to adopt the city's proposed zero waste resolution, and would like to address the issue of treating demolition and construction waste products, which are being diverted from the landfill at only 6% of their volume, as I understand it. The draft zero waste resolution mentions the goal of working with economic development partners and investing in resource recovery infrastructure to foster a circular economy. So I'd like to address these issues. We are fortunate to have several commercial services in Boulder, Larimer, and other counties that deal with the reuse of selective excess construction materials for other purposes, such as municipal public works products. And also we saw that Europe has encouraged ideas of the same sort, such as grinding materials that might be incorporated into bricks and so on. I'd like to mention that the city could become more attractive to residents and businesses if green buildings and LEED criteria were also included as financial incentives in its guidelines for non-residential buildings, as well as possibly other residential buildings. Our area is in an excellent locale to consult with experts in these fields. For example, one of the front-range college campuses addresses green and sustainable architectural practices in its courses, Colorado University also offers environmental engineering programs, and CSU offers courses in advanced materials research. With those lofty goals in mind, I would encourage the city to develop partnerships with businesses, universities, and other cities and counties to make Longmont a more attractive and environmentally responsive city that takes bold steps to reduce much of our manufactured waste products that are currently going into landfills, which are out of space. Thank you very much. Thank you, Hazel. Strider, you're up next. Guys, that means half to half glasses. Strider, Benston, 951 17th Avenue. Sorry I'm a week or two late. There's so much that's been going on. The Supreme Court passed the open gun carry law and then the rape and incest law, right almost at the same time. And they're directly related. And what's next? The party of small government is on the road to criminalize anything and anybody who threatens their absolute dominance. One example, in Texas after the Valde killings, the governor said, oh, there's no problem with guns. It's a mental health thing. And he personally stole 211 million dollars from Texas mental health and gave it to the border patrol. So all of this stuff is going on. In the hearings today, there's a quote of the former president who said when the mob came to storm the Capitol, he said, they're not here to hurt me. Take the mags away, the detection devices. Let them all in the Capitol with their guns. A lot of people had AR-15s. They didn't show up because there was law in Washington. You can't carry AR-15s into the Capitol to kill all the senators or whoever you want to create a civil war. That would have been the direct effect had they succeeded in carrying their guns into the Capitol. Two or three people had them, but they were afraid to use them. Hang my pants would have been carried out and we would have hundreds or thousands dead and maybe a civil war right now. So like Maya Angelou said, when they show you who they are, believe them. And like I said a couple of weeks ago, someone calls me in once, it's an incident. Someone calls me in twice, it's a tendency. Someone calls me in three times, it's policy. This is the policy and they're trying to take over Colorado with Secretariat of States and that kind of thing. The point is kill as many people as possible. Create the politics of fear and then you can sell more guns. And the concept behind that is we got more guns than you have. So if they have a civil war, they think they're going to win. Democracy means dialogue. We have to learn how to speak with each other and listen. And that's the only chance we have left if we're going to survive. Thank you. Thank you, Strider. Naomi Courland. Hi, my name is Naomi Courland and I live at 2073 Goldfinch Court. I am the board chair of Sustainable Resilient Longmont and SRL Zero Waste Committee. This year our committee secured a Boulder County grant to increase waste diversion at festivals in Longmont Zero Waste Education and recently helped divert 92 percent of the waste generated at the downtown summer concert series. We are committed to seeing Longmont improve our waste diversion by empowering residents with more opportunities. In addition to hosting monthly community cleanups and facilitating waste diversion at events, we also administered a zero waste survey this spring to assist in collecting public feedback for the zero waste resolution draft being presented to council tonight. We have participated in multiple feedback sessions with city staff on the resolution and were gratified to find many of our recommendations incorporated into this latest draft. Unfortunately, there were some significant disappointments in the draft being presented tonight as well. The most frustrating addition to this draft was a noticeable reluctance to put forth strong, decisive language and instead it includes loopholes and off-ramps to the list of actions that the city can take to reach our zero waste goals. All meaningful action is prefaced with the phrases pending further analysis and community input. These measures may include and to the extent allowed by the city's business plan and annual budget processes. This is a resolution not a binding ordinance so there is no need for weak wishy-washy language to couch recommended actions. All it does is remove the sense of urgency and commitment to action on behalf of the city preemptively incorporating potential roadblocks and delays in what should be a statement of strong, resolute action. We are also disappointed in the reduction of targets compared to previously identified goals. Diversion of 70% by 2030 and 85% by 2050 may be more realistic based on the city's internal analysis but since this is a resolution and not a binding contract it behooves the city to be as aspirational as possible. If we set our goals as high as could possibly be achieved even if we fall short we will have prioritized policy for maximum impact. If we don't aim high we won't even have the opportunity to attain those more lofty goals. Overall we support the recommended actions and policies that are listed in the zero-waste resolution draft today. City staff has compiled a list that, if adhered to, will produce results. However, we are concerned that by including off-ramps and weaker targets this excellent list of actions will be taken as nothing more than half-hearted suggestions rather than commitments to make real change in Longmont. We urge council to aim higher and amend the language to remove the previously cited phrases as they do not serve the urgency of our current climate crisis. Thank you. Thank you Naomi. So now we are on the consent agenda part of our meeting. Don would you mind reading the items on the consent agenda into record? Absolutely Mayor Peck. Item 9A is ordinance 2022-25, a bill for an ordinance making additional appropriations for expenses and liabilities of the City of Longmont for the fiscal year beginning January 1st 2022. And by the way second reading and public hearing for ordinances tonight will be on July 12th 2022. 9B is ordinance 2022-26, a bill for an ordinance amending section 3.04 0.885 of the Longmont Municipal Code adopting an amended and restated City of Longmont General Employees Retirement Plan. Item 9C is resolution 2022-104, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and Boulder County for the Antelope Park Forest Restoration Project. 9D is resolution 2022-105, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and Larimer County Economic Workforce Development for Forestry Services at Button Rock. 9E is resolution 2022-106, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and Boulder County for financial assistance to older adults and caregivers of older adults. 9F is resolution 2022-107, a resolution of the Longmont City Council authorizing lease agreements with option to purchase between the City of Longmont as lessee and the Huntington National Bank as lessor for golf carts for the City golf courses. 9G is resolution 2022-108, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and Boulder County for the provision of County Reimbursable Child Care at the Longmont Summer Day Camp. And 9H is approve a letter of support from the City of Longmont to the United States Forest Service concerning the federal permitting process for the St. Vrain Forest Health Partnership process. Thank you, Don. I would like to pull item A, 2022-25. Are there any other Councilors that want to pull items? Now, then I will move the consent agenda minus item A. So it's been moved by myself, seconded by Mayor Pro Temrod Ricas to move the consent agenda minus item A. Let's vote. So I need to go back to my... And that carries unanimously. Thank you. We are at items on the second reading and public hearings on any matter. Item A is public hearing and consideration of recommendations for 2022 Community Development Block Grant or CDBG Program Action Plan. Are there any questions from Council on this ordinance? Seeing none. I do have Victoria Leneve. Oh, I'm sorry. We're going to go to the presentation first. Sorry, Molly. I didn't see you there. And then you can come up, Victoria. Just staring at Don. Okay, perfect. Do you need to share the screen? That's all right. I'll answer that. Let me make a decision. That's okay. I think we're just going to have to roll with it. Council Member Martin, can you also open your live stream version of this? I'm having a hard time sharing Molly's screen. I'm sorry. Deputy Cedar, I can't hear what you said. Council Member Martin, I'm wondering if you can check out your live stream version and I can send you the link if you need to either on Longmont Public Media or the city's YouTube to watch the presentation. I forgot to give myself rights to share the screen. Yeah. Oh, Don can email it to you too. Sorry about that. Yeah. Okay. She's going to send it to you right now. Mayor Peck, Members of Council, thank you for having me tonight. I'm Molly O'Donnell. Housing and Community Investment Division Director. Tonight, I'm going to be discussing our 2022 CDBG Action Plan and Affordable Housing Fund recommendations. So just a little bit of an intro, especially because we have an all new group working on this this year between me as the director and my brand new and wonderful staff that has been working very hard to put this together tonight. So we do operate off of five year consolidated plan goals. That's for 2020 to 2024. We put this together in conjunction with the Boulder County and Broomfield Regional Consortium and set shared goals, strategies, and funding priorities for the program years during this period. That consolidated plan outlines goals to pursue during a five year period to meet community needs. CDBG and home programs advance the following objectives for the benefit of low and moderate income households that you can see here summarized. Rental housing programs, the goal there is to maintain and produce additional affordable rental housing, particularly for households with incomes below 50% of the area median income or AMI. Existing home ownership preservation by maintaining and increasing the inventory of affordable home ownership by assisting low income households with rehab and accessibility needs to ensure decent safe and sanitary housing conditions. New home buyer opportunities to increase the inventory through innovative housing development models as opportunities arise and by providing first time home buyer classes. Housing stabilization programs, we work with community partners to provide housing resources and services to individuals and families at risk of or experiencing homelessness. Community investments is when we work with regional partners to coordinate investment strategies that fund programs and projects designed to meet impact to impact existing conditions that threaten the health and welfare of our community, particularly for residents with low income or special needs. And finally, economic development goals to promote job creation or retention through support for primarily micro enterprises or small businesses. So for our action plan this year, this is a requirement for CDBG funding. We are working to implement the goals of that consolidated plan. So our program year is January 1st to December 31st. One thing that we've been working on is how come we are coming to you in June of 2022 for in the middle of the program year. And that's really because our HUD funding doesn't actually get announced until about May of each year. And then we have a statutory deadline to submit our action plan by August 16th of each year and we coordinate with the consortium members to do that together. So we're in the third year of our five-year plan. We do have to have a public hearing to set those CDBG funding allocations. So that's tonight. We are doing a 30-day public notice. This runs through July 16th. So if we receive any additional comments, we will include those in the action plan and we'll bring them back to council if need be. And then finally, our affordable housing fund is not a requirement of our action plan but because our programs are so tied together, we bring those recommendations to you at the same time. So that's just some background on the timelines and requirements. So this year, our CDBG funding amount available is $519,709. This is a 7% reduction from 2021 and it's actually our second lowest allocation since 2003. We think there's a couple reasons for this going on lately. First of all, there's only a set dollar value for all entitlement communities of which Longmont is one and so the more cities that reach the population thresholds that allow them to be in entitlement, there's still the same amount of dollars to go around. Additionally, we know there's a lot of other federal funding out there specifically for housing and community investment because of COVID. And so we think that at HUD and at the federal level, generally there's a lot of focus on that funding and so that's a couple reasons why we think it's going down. We also just have $5,000 in estimated program income so together we had about $524,709 to put out. So we do run between two and four times a year. We run a funding cycle or so an application period to accept project proposals from the community. We do a lot of community outreach. We held our application period May 9th to the 27th. We reached out to historic partners, community service organizations. We put an ad essentially in the Housing Colorado newsletter trying to reach maybe some affordable housing developers that work elsewhere in the state that maybe aren't paying attention what happens in Longmont but we would want them to consider doing projects here. And then in conjunction with the Action Plan we put publishing in the Times Call as an advertisement. It's of course on our city website. We provided pre-application support to anybody that got in touch with us to try and help them guide them through creating a complete application. And then we're working on an online survey to pair with the end of our public review period to get some feedback about our process. So we received six viable applications during that period. Four of them were referred for a CDBG program, the Boiler County Housing Counseling Program for $50,000, Entrepreneurship for All $30,206, and three Longmont Housing Authority Rental Housing Rehab projects totaling just over $124,000. We referred one program project to our Affordable Housing Fund program, a Habitat for Humanity Affordable Home Ownership Project for $646,717. So we also ensured that we put funding into our homeowner-occupied rehab program. That doesn't go out for competitive award in this funding cycle. We do accept applications from those home owners throughout the year, but we make sure we set aside. So this $215,000 is higher than we've done in the last couple of years. We've already expressed to you how that program has been difficult in recent years because of lots of factors we've gone over, cost escalations, lack of contractors being interested in doing this type of work that really does come with more strings attached to meet the program requirements. But in this case, we have a fresh opportunity. We have a fully fleshed staff. We have somebody coming in with some rehab experience, CDBG rehab experience from elsewhere in the country. We want to really work on this program to increase its usability and make more of a difference. And also, we didn't receive enough viable applications to fully fill out our CDBG funding. So we put the excess into here. And if we get more applications in the future, we can reallocate some of this if it's not looking feasible. So you'll see, and for each of these projects, each of them shows on the screen here what council work plan goal that they support. The Boulder County Housing Counseling and Personal Finance program, this is something we accept an application for and typically fund every year. This is required for our down payment assistance and rehab programs. It will assist about 240 low income residents, giving them counseling services for really a lot of things. Home ownership, rental, debt, a lot of personal finance issues. We have a new one this year that's from Entrepreneurship for All that's not specifically related to affordable housing. They, this organization did apply several years ago when they were just getting started in Longmont. Since then, they've really established themselves and shown us what kind of work that they can accomplish for low income residents that are looking to be small business owners. So we are allowed to grant up to $20,000 of our CDBG funding as a public service and the services they provide related to education for small business owners and prospective small business owners really do qualify as that public service and therefore we could offer them $30,206. The Longmont Housing Authority came in with several applications for rehabs on their properties. So the first one is security camera systems at multiple properties. They requested $61,600 to improve safety and security for what equates to about 247 low income rental households. This has really proven to be a valuable thing on the properties that have been able to have security camera systems installed. So this would really be a benefit both for management and for resident safety. The second project is the parking lot and accessibility rehab for hover crossing. So the hardstone and lodge. We do have a capital needs assessment on hand that shows that there are significant deterioration problems and trip hazards and things that are out of compliance with ADA that the Housing Authority does need to fix as soon as possible. So this would serve those 100 low income seniors living in that rental development. And then finally the Aspen Meadows Neighborhood Playground is a $25,800 grant, $800 grant. This playground right now is unusable. It's structurally unsafe and it is roped off so to not be used. So this would really improve safety and quality of life for the families living at Aspen Meadows. So other than competitive applications, we could set aside 20% of our program funding for administration to cover staff costs and other administrative costs each year. That totals $104,942 this year. If we don't use it all, it gets reallocated for projects. Total with these applications, we'd serve 553 unique households. A couple of those LHA ones do cross over. So those households get served twice by the two different projects. That's 20 owner occupied homes that we could rehab, 275 affordable rental homes in LHA, 240 households help to maintain housing stability through financing, counseling, and about 18 individuals with the amount of funding that we can provide can participate in small business training. That equates to $804 of investment per household assisted and brings in $690,000 of additional leverage into our community for a ratio of $1.32 to every dollar spent on CDBG. This is just to reference. This is in your packets. This is the master table of the budgets if you're looking for where this is all broken out and shown. For the affordable housing fund, we have approximately over $2.5 million for 2022. This really does bleed into 2023 since we do do those application cycles more than once per year. That includes the general fund transfer of a million dollars, estimated $300,000 for the marijuana tax. And in this case, we are finally projecting our full fee and lieu revenue for 2022 and 2023 to help serve these projects over the next year. Plus we have $200,000 in program income from prior projects that have paid back their loans. So there's about $2.7 million that we're working with for affordable housing fund over the next year. So for my competitive funding, we are recommending that Habitat for Humanity of St. Rain Valley receive $646,717 in a 0% loan. It's a 20-year term, but it's paid at Certificate of Occupancy when they can sell the properties. This is over at the East Rogers Road site. They have received city funding in the past. They received donated land from the city and an additional affordable housing fund loan for the land purchased several years ago. And then they're getting a lot of other funding sources to cover this project from the state and elsewhere. This would produce nine new units that would be sold to individuals and families making between 30% and 60% of the AMI. So this funding is specifically for the public improvements. They are ready to break ground on those here come August or so and then would be building the homes starting in next year. Otherwise in the affordable housing fund, we're setting aside about 17% this year and that's $483,086. This is to cover staff costs and other admin. We really do between CDBG and the Affordable Housing Fund. We are needing more admin in the prior years because of our new structure, which is put together to really ideally serve the programs that we administer and deliver on the projects we want to put out there for the city. Nine households would be served with the Affordable Housing Fund with this one habitat project. That results in about $71,000 of investment per household and but it's leveraging $2.8 million and change bringing that into the community. So if we put a dollar into this habitat project for the public improvements, we're bringing in $4.50 of investment. We also have some non-competitive projects in the Affordable Housing Fund. This is what we call our set-asides. So we have $20,000 tagged for the National Development Council Contract. That is a consulting firm that we are using to help on some of the affordable housing development goals that the city has. We've set aside the full amount of the housing needs assessment. However, $86,250 of it will be reimbursed by DOLA. So the amount the Affordable Housing Fund is covering is really just the local match, about $28,000. But we want to account for it all so we don't spend it. Plus $50,275 of rehab for the city-owned Adrienne House. This is additional funding due to construction cost escalation but that construction has started and we are ready to go and we'll be able to rent that house to a large family in need here come 2023. And then finally the $300,000 ongoing payment for the nine acres associated with Costco. That is a five-year commitment. Looks like we're a little cut off here but we do set aside 171,560 for the fee offsets that we provide to private development. And that number is, let's see if I can get it, 979. Trying to view here, I can't get it. It's in here, it's in here, it is available. We can pull out what that has there but that should be our funding for, well, I can't see it. I'm not going to guess at the moment. We can follow up with that if you are curious. It will be detailed here, here is our total. Oh, I recall. So that left about $1.6 million that had not yet been allocated out of the Affordable Housing Fund. So as we do those quarterly funding cycles we will work to tag that to projects. We do expect some larger development projects to come through that might qualify for that. And I'd ask you to consider any questions about the program and then continue with public hearing if you don't mind. Councilor Waters. Thanks, Mayor Peck. Well, can you go back to slide one? Sure. Please. I guess it's slide two actually, the goals. These are meaningful statements but they're certainly not written as goals. Based on what you presented, how would you know whether or not we accomplish these goals? So the- And how should I know whether or not we've accomplished these goals? So this is our consolidated plan was written in 2020. I can tell you that if we were writing it today I would have your voice in my mind about that goal structure. We do have objectives together. Our overall objective with the consortium is to produce 12% of our housing stock as affordable by 2035. That is our end-all-be-all goal and it includes preserving the existing affordable stock so that we don't dip down and have to recover from there. So that is the true measurable impact. I would say that for these individual goals our con plan in 2020 to cover 2025 in the next five years could definitely be fleshed out to have more specific objectives included, measurable. Yeah and they if they're- They couldn't be goals or objectives or both but without baseline data, without performance targets, without time frames it's not very useful, right? They're interesting statements. And the plan of work I think it's well thought out and I'm certain it's spot on in terms of what we need but in the interest of accountability there can be none with that set of goals unless you just kind of make it up as you go along and I understand this is from 2020 but it's been two years and is there something that constrains us from actually turning these statements into actual goals that are measurable? We can do that. It wouldn't be part of our HUD approved consolidated plan but we can have another document that kind of flushes that out. I don't know what to say about HUD. Well I could say a lot about HUD having what we've gone through but this is more about us, all right, in terms of what we can celebrate, what we can learn, where do we apply more resource effort, intellectual horsepower, whatever, as time goes by because of what we are or are not accomplishing and as I said, it's just there's no way we can hold ourselves accountable or anyone else based on that set of statements as goals, right? I'm just saying and I know I sound like a broken record every time we get into this but I think there's nobody else, this is not HUD to, this is not HUD telling us what to do with this. This is us not doing this and I think we need to. So just a statement and I'll support this. This time I'm not certain I will vote for this in the future if we don't turn these into real goal statements. Could you go to slide seven, please? Slide seven. May I add that our year end performance, our caper that we presented here in late March, that is our annual assessment of what we've achieved and it does conglomerate over the years. So we could try and look for next year in reporting that. And I get the process of adding it up and assessing where we are but it ought to be added up and it's set, it ought to be added up and it says in relationship to what we were trying to achieve, how far did we exceed those goals? How, where did we fall short? And get us into a kind of a virtuous cycle of improvement. When I, if I look at this and I, the CWP3A3.2 is referring to the council work plan and goals and statements that are in that work plan, which I think is likely useful in this context because you've got to have something to work with. But I just want to say for the record, this council doesn't have a work plan that I'm aware of. That was a former council's work plan. Goals adopted by former council, I'd love for us to apply ourselves to that set of goals or some set of goals that we can embrace and adopt as a council. But I think it's misleading to the public to suggest that we have a work plan and that we have goals we've adopted as other than the affordable, the 12%, we have yet to adopt a goal with respect to attainable housing or workforce housing, whatever language we're going to use. So for you and I'll say to Harold and Sandy and I know you don't have much to hang on to in terms of tying work to priorities because we haven't done that work. But I just want to say for the record, I think this is misleading and I think we ought to be careful about saying to the public somehow this is tied to something that this council has adopted because it's just not true. Go to slide 14, please. Just like one clarification, the nine units that I'm looking at, the second bullet, I'm assuming is specifically in reference to the habitat property over a suggestion to the Mountain Brook project. No, that's actually separate. This is over on East Rogers Road. Okay. It's below Third Avenue and on East Rogers. So those four lots and what is projected to go on those four lots separate from what we're talking about right here? Correct, because they did not get any city funding. Are these nine single family homes? No, there are three buildings, three units each. So multiplexes. All right, very good. That was confusing. And I just make one more reference to the council work plan that I know that you didn't create that. I appreciate your work on this. I think that's more on us than on you, but I don't think we ought to continue the I'll continue to call this out if we do. I don't think we ought to use that work either upon which to ground or base a set of an action plan because it's just not genuine. Thanks. So thank you, Molly, but I do have a question as well. And I do want to address the council work plan. Unless that is amended, it is my assumption that that work plan has carried over and is a council work plan that has been adopted. We can always bring it back to amend it or update it, but to just say it's not our work plan, I look at it as the council's work plan going forward. So we can have that conversation perhaps with some legal advice at a later date. But I don't want one statement to be a council statement because I'm not sure we all look at that exactly the same way, but it is good to address it at some other point. But I do have a question for you. So this is my ignorance or I didn't catch it. You when I listened to you said that we actually don't get the CDBG funds until August. Is that correct? That's correct. So we you actually apply for them, but we don't get them until eight months later. Well, it's a formula allocation, so we get assigned funds without applying. We find out the amount about May, as long as we get our action plan in, we get that funding in hand at about August. Okay. And then we're expected to still spend it by the end of the program year, but we definitely carry over some. So can I am I thinking correctly when I say that our actual projects are a year in arrears? I with our projects really do last from here to next June, as what we in in actuality. Okay, that makes plan the next year. All right, that was my question. Are there any other questions? If I can add to that, I think the timeliness piece is what frustrates us a little bit because we find out how much money we're going to get, but we don't there's been years. It's been after August because of contract delays. So then we have to get the contracts, and then we have to spend it. But to Molly's point, then we have to meet the timeliness standard as if we got it when we were supposed to. So that's when you hear us talking about that. That is really what we're talking about is the lag from when we actually get the money to win. It moves around. And we are working with the consortium and our joint HUD rep to see about the benefits, pros and cons of maybe shifting our program year so that it all makes a little bit more sense time wise. So we'll be having that conversation between now and our next complaint 2025. Okay, great. Thank you so much. So Victoria, you had signed up, but do you want to speak on the CDBG funding? Come on up to the microphone, please. Victoria, would you mind giving us your, I already know your name, but your address, please? 2000 Sunset Way. It's the suite's apartments. It's owned by the city of Longmont governed by the housing authority. Just to give you a little background here, I have a petition of 37 residents in our building looking for some new safety enhancements. The background is there have been a lot of robberies that occur that never show up on camera. The reason for this is purported that several residents of the building have master keys. So in recent months, I was in the shower and I had believed that there had been occurrences where people had entered my apartment. So I barred my door when while in the shower, my door had snapped open. The bar had been busted and thrown on the floor. Nothing was found on the camera. Last week I came home from work. All my furniture was moved from the walls and I went through and counted a bunch of stuff in my apartment. I couldn't really find anything of significance gone, but I believe the people that have done this are some methods that deal and use at the other end of the hallway. I went out to dinner to get some dinner. I came back an hour later about five or six hundred items from my apartment were missing and nothing shows up on the cameras. So the residents are asking that all the keys be master keys be re keyed. We've been asking for this for quite some time. We were told it would happen in time. Well, I changed my lock yesterday. I'm sitting at my desk and somebody's trying to open my door. Thank God I changed my locks. So most of the people on this list have similar stories. Most of us are senior citizen elderly women that this has happened to and nothing's being done. And we're also asking for the camera system for all logins to be disabled and deactivated and new unique logins and passwords be created for certain key people only to have access to the cameras. Thank you very much. And you can give that list to our city attorney. I mean our city manager. Yes. Our attorney. You don't want to. I changed my locks because I asked for something to be done and I was ignored. And they were in my house three times last week and it was very obvious. I filed a police report. The police are doing nothing. I've been going around to the pod shops myself looking for my jewelry. So I'm very frustrated. I'm also appalled that the city of Longland Housing Authority is not apologized to me or even addressed my concerns. They're just like there's nothing on the cameras and every resident that has been going through this I guess it's been going on for about eight years never gets any satisfaction. Nothing ever gets done. So I'm asking whoever is above these people that govern them to take some action and get something done immediately for our safety. Thank you. We'll definitely look into it. Thank you. With that I close the public hearing. Is there anybody else out there that wants to speak to the CDBG funding? With that I close the public hearing and I'd like to ask for a motion on ordinance. Which one is it? It's not an ordinance. It's yep. It's just the action plan. Okay. Public hearing. Okay. So Councilwoman Hidalgo-Ferring moved the recommendations for the 2022 community development block grant program action plan. Do I have a second? Thank you. That has been seconded by Councilor Yarbrough. Let's vote. So I'm voting in favor. I can't get to it yet. And that carried unanimously. Thank you. The next item on second hearing is the McIntosh Lake annexation. The first one is R-2022-109. A resolution finding a parcel of land known as the McIntosh Lake annexation. Generally located north of Lake Shore Drive, south of State Highway 66, west of Harvard Street, eligible for annexation. Do we have a presentation? Mr. Engstit. Mayor and Council, no. We don't have a presentation. Glenn Vandenweigen, your planning director. You're better. Sorry. You're close. And then we also have David Bell and Dan Wilford from Parks and Natural Resources. We're happy to answer any questions you might have. Let me see this. Councillor Hedoggle-Ferring. Thank you, Mayor. So as you know, this is in my ward and I've been in contact with several staff members over, you know, just more activity since the pandemic just increased levels of activity. I think, you know, for the longest time, it's been this hidden gem. And now the public knows. So I've spoken to residents who've experienced just more traffic, more visitors to the lake. In the annexation of this, would it allow? So this was a question that, you know, I think, you know, I had asked before, but I really want, you know, the public to know that, you know, really what this annexation would mean for the facility, not just in the park, but around what are people in the area to expect through this annexation? I'll grab David Bell. Probably be a better person to answer it. Mayor, Councilmembers, David Bell, Director of Parks and Natural Resources. As far as the annexation, that is going to be the portion of the property that is in unincorporated Boulder County. So the areas that a lot of the complaints are happening with parking along the streets are already in the city of Longmont. So be nothing there. As far as the lake in those areas in unincorporated Boulder County, that would mean when there's a complaint coming in, it would come into our dispatch center. We'd be the first ones to be able to respond to that, so it would be a little quicker action. We still have mutual agreements with Boulder County and with hygiene fire if there are emergencies out there, but it really brings it more into the city's control to be able to manage that as a holistic property with the trail going around it. But a lot of the concerns with people parking around the lake are already things that are covered by the property being in the city of Longmont this time. There we go. Thank you. Thank you. So some of the comments I had received or concerns is really out when people are walking on the other side of the lake, which I believe is Boulder County. And would there be options or would we be able to have restroom facilities out in that area? Would we be able to have control over additional facilities or predominantly restrooms? Am I back on for you? Yes. Those areas that become where we incorporated the city through the annexation would allow us to go through the city's process. So we would not have to again go through Boulder County for the land use process if we were going to put in those amenities. However, those amenities would be something that we'd be looking at. Again, part of the whole management of the lake and wanting to make sure that as an amenity that was needed and that we had the resources to maintain and upkeep that. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. I think also as a reminder, we did add a couple of park rangers in the budget last year, David. Correct. And Council Member Heddlefairing, working on that response right now, but we do have a very good database that shows the patrols that are out in that area so we can actually track how much time the rangers are spending out there, what percentage of time is out there, the kind of contacts they're making. And I think that I think is positive just looking at briefly as most of the contacts really are for people being out on the water without personal flotation devices which is really one of the bigger safety issues that we are concerned about out there. Great. Thank you. Are there any other comments from staff or questions? Okay. Seeing none, I'll put it up for the public. Is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this resolution? Seeing none, I would ask for a motion on the resolution R-2022-109. Thank you. It's been moved by Councilor Heddlefairing, seconded by Councilor Waters. Let's vote. Not at all. All those in favor? That passes unanimously. Council Member Martin, did you vote on this? Just a show of a hand would be fine. All right. Thank you. Now it passes unanimously. Thank you, Councilor Martin. The second part of this lake annexation is 2022-21. It's a bill for an ordinance conditionally approving the Macintosh Lake annexation generally located north of Lakeshore Drive, south of State Highway 66, west of Harvard Street, and zoning the property N-PF public. Do we have another staff presentation on this? Is there anybody from the public that would like to speak on this ordinance? Seeing none, how about Councillors? Does anyone have speak on this ordinance? No. So can I have a motion? Thank you. So it's been moved by Councilor Waters, seconded by Councilor Heddlefairing. Let's vote. You are. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Martin. I was waiting for your hand. So that carries, passes unanimously. Thank you. Our third item on the second reading is ordinance 2020-22-22. It's a bill for an ordinance authorizing the consent to Vance Brand Municipal Airport's lease assignment for Hangar Parcel H-25 and H-25 HP to Stephen Croft Tenant. Do we have a staff report on this? Mayor Peck? Yes. We do not have a staff report. However, I would like to take this opportunity to introduce you to Levi Brown, our new airport manager who is here this evening. Great. So that going forward, you know who you're looking for in the audience when you have leases and airport matters before you. So thank you, Levi, for coming tonight. I think I hit the right button there. Hi, I'm Levi. I'm the new airport manager. Well, it's great to meet you. I actually emailed you. Yes, right before coming over, I responded. So you'll have an email waiting for you. Okay, great. Thank you so much. Do you want to comment on this Hangar? It's pretty straightforward. We have a few Hangar owners who are, well, we had one Hangar owner pass away and so his partner has purchased the share of his Hangar from his estate and is looking now to have the lease of the land in his name. And two more sales, the subsequent ones on this list where the owner is moving out of state and selling his property that's on the city's leased land and that's kind of what's going on. Okay, great. Thank you. It's nice to meet you. Nice to meet you too. Do we have anybody from the public that would like to speak on this matter? Seeing none, anybody on council? Any of the counselors? Seeing none, can I have a motion on this ordinance? No, not on the ordinance. We did on the resolution. Thank you. So it's been moved by Councillor Waters, seconded by Councillor Yarbrough. Let's vote. Councillor Martin. So that carries unanimously. Thank you. And we have a couple more. This is a bill for an ordinance. It's 2022-23, authorizing the consent to Vance Brand Municipal Airport's lease assignment for Hangar parcel H-28E to Mark Reagan tenant. Do we have a staff report on this? No. How about counselors? Do you have any questions on this one? I would like to open it up to public hearing. Is there anybody in the public that would like to speak to this ordinance? Seeing no one, can I have a motion? Thank you. So it's been moved by Councillor Hidalgo-Ferring, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez. Let's vote. And that carries unanimously. Thank you. The next one is ordinance 2022-24, authorizing the consent to Vance Brand Municipal Airport's lease assignment for Hangar parcel H-73 to Megan A. McIntosh, revocable trust. Or do we have a staff report? No. Are there any questions from council? I would like to open it up to the public for a public hearing, seeing none. Can I have a motion? I move ordinance 2022-24. So it's been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez. Seconded by Councillor Hidalgo-Ferring. Let's vote. And that carries unanimously. We're now at items removed from the consent agenda. And I moved item A. I just have a couple of questions. And just as a renewal of it, it's a bill for an ordinance making additional appropriations for expenses and liabilities of the City of Longmont for the fiscal year beginning January 1st. So hi. Hi. I just have a couple of questions as I was reading through it. I saw that we were appropriating 64,000 for charging stations. And I was wondering, did we go out for any grant money for those charging stations? I'm going to have to ask for some help from someone behind me. You're working on it? I forgot what part it was on. I should have written that down. Jump in on this. So this is money that was projected to be spent for last year. And we're carrying it over to spend this year actually as part of the conversation that we had today in the budget hearings regarding charging stations. And so what Cash said is he's looking at it is they're looking at the development of additional charging stations as we convert our fleet to more electric vehicles. And that's actually, I think, when we're going to apply for the grants. Oh, OK. Yes. Mayor Peck. Becky Doyle, Director of Strategic Integration. So the Chargerhead Colorado grants are available multiple times per year. And we definitely, every time we approach a Charger project, we look for those funding opportunities. And are certainly continuing to monitor other funding resources and are going to hopefully be welcoming our grant coordinator within the next couple of weeks. Oh, that would be great. Monitor those more closely. Yeah, I just know there's a lot of money out there for charging stations. Yes. So I want to make sure that. And to give you a sense, kind of what we talked about today is as we look at electroflying our fleet, actually what we talked about in the budget discussion today was level three chargers in terms of looking at that capacity for our fleet. So we have the fast charging capability versus level two and what we need. And so that is the work that they're moving through right now. I think that's a due for Cash to talk about tomorrow and the capital improvement plans. Just wanted to provide some more information to you all. Perfect. Okay. So my other question is RSVP. We are moving forward and there's like over a million dollars allocated for that. Are we getting any FEMA money for this stretch? Mayor Peck, yes. There are several reaches that are that are still in place. So there's there's one that's currently under construction or just completed that does have the balance of our FEMA funding from the 2013 funding after that flood event. And we are continuing to pursue FEMA funding for the remaining stretch that the overreach that is also the reach that we hope to fund with bond proceeds if we're not successful in that pursuit of the larger BRIC grants. Okay. And the reason I asked was that the last update we got was that we had run out of FEMA funding and we're reapplying. So I was just wondering if this portion that you are appropriating was part of what we did or did not have FEMA funding for. Right. So that that this particular funding there there's probably funding across several different funding sources. Okay. So it may appear more than once in that document. And this is funding from 2021 that we're bringing forward into 2022. Some some offset likely but a lot of the funding is also local. Okay. My other question is that these are appropriations not necessary allocations at this point to the project or to the fund or to is that correct? Right. Yes. For the for the carry over appropriation these these are our budgeted funds that have previously been allocated to the project. So we're we're bringing them forward but as as unspent from 2021 into 2022. And the reason I ask that is that according to this report 95,000 is going to the 529 jump. And I remember that we gave quite a bit of money the last time. And the reason I asked has it been allocated because I would like to know where we are on that. How many residents in the district have taken advantage of it? Could we before we allocate this have a report from I think his name is Josh from uh can yeah. Switch. So this money was allocated last year for the 529. We're we're bringing it forward as we're continuing it from last year. I think that's the piece in this. As we talk about as we talk about this into the future that is going to be part of the budget presentation in terms of looking at this piece of it for next year. This is really carrying over from last year's okay money. But yeah we can look at definitely I would like a report from him and where we stand what is you know how much are our residents using this? Is it a good should we continue? So we will have that information great budget if that's okay. Yeah, it'd be great. Thanks. Thank you. That's all I wanted. Councilor Hedon go faring. Thank you, Mayor. I do have a follow-up question on the 529 jump program. So you know I as it comes back to us I would also like to know how much of the money that is designated for this program is being used for our cultural brokers for outreach. Getting people to come out and really educate parents on the on this utilization of this program. I know a lot of folks who don't have you know they you might have first generation students you or immigrants. You might have students who this is their first year going to you know this is their first generation of kids going to college. So there needs to be a lot of education around there. How much of that money is being used towards that so I think just when it comes back to us if we can find out how much investment are we putting in towards actually educating to make it successful. I think this dollar amount looking at Teresa is actually for the 529. We're augmenting that with work that we're doing with staff in terms of trying to bring that attention forward so that it's a different pool. This is just the direct allocation on the 529. Okay okay and then you know I'd want to make sure that that is adequately funded as well. You know being right now I'm teaching summer school I'm the only person in the building that speaks Spanish so I'm not just teaching my class I'm doing multiple other duties so the pressure that it puts on people who have these additional talents you know I want to make sure that they're being compensated as well. We'll bring that to you let you know what we're doing. Great and then the supporting action for mental health initiative was the other one that I saw that so that's carrying over as well it's under the carryover. I know at one time when I was involved with it it was funded through a grant back with Julie Phillips I believe it was it was years ago and I just I was wondering you know is that another program that is adequately being funded or is that that's that who has no who has Trisa do you have that these are funds that we have uh we appropriated at least a couple years ago and have been carrying forward um they have been at about this level in each of the prior carryover that we've done so they have not really been used to date over the past couple years okay um no the reason why I asked is when I had started and it was working and I think it was like 2017 2018 I can't remember it was around that time and when we started the Latino outreach and we I just remember us getting together often I'm not involved with the the group now but I was wondering because I felt like at that time we were gaining some some momentum in reaching out to our Latino communities around mental health looking at breaking stigma around mental health and I you know I was wondering I don't know how much the grant was initially I thought it was more than than 66,000 I wasn't sure but um but it sounds too as as the group is not really tapping into those funds is that correct well I can tell you that this amount has not been spent for the past couple years okay um we can certainly look into that larger scope of the whole program for you and and see how those funds have been spent okay because I know that this you know at least during the time that I was involved with it um we were really we were I mean I was doing trainings for foster families for other um for our Latino community at Gafisito said um the parents involved in education so we were we were getting out there I you know I just want to make sure that it's still this is a good program we want to make sure that it's still being utilized and to its full potential we can but I think it's I don't think it's you I think it's it's another department that I'll need to reach out to but we will definitely follow up on that for thank you I will follow up and I think one of the things that um we're going to talk about just generally with mental health uh I think the mayor made the motion on the marijuana tax and as we look at it um we're starting to talk about we know we have zero to 18 and families we know we have 55 plus 18 to 55 non-family in terms of mental health is I think really the gap and I we're going to be entering into some conversations to really look at how do we move on this and and and to ensure that we're actually moving in a direction where it's a cohesive direction from the city but also that we're um approaching this in a way that makes sense and and really applying our resources and so um that's work that we have to undertake as we um continue moving forward yeah and I'd like to be involved and offer input in that in that conversation as well so it will be definitely brief hit me up talking to council as we're moving forward on this okay great thank you so no more discussion on that uh I would like to move uh ordinance 2022-25 thank you it's been segmented by councilor waters let's vote please and that carries unanimously we do have some Longmont housing authority business so can I have a motion to recess uh as the Longmont city council I I'll make the motion for I move that we recess as the Longmont city council and and convene as the Longmont housing authority board of commissioners it's been moved uh segmented by councilor uh hodoggle faring let's vote that carries unanimously I need to make the exact same motions that I made for city council meeting uh commissioner martin is unable to participate tonight in person due to a personal matter that requires her to be out of state staff is prepared for commissioner martin to participate remotely but first the board of commissioners must take action to allow this I move to suspend by reference council rule of procedure 25.2 point a point to to allow commissioner martin to participate excuse me participate remotely in this meeting it has been segmented by councilor yarbrough let's vote that carries unanimously I also moved to allow electronic participation by commissioner martin through July 2022 do due to a personal matter that requires her to be out of state and unable to participate in person that has been segmented by councilor hodoggle faring let's vote thank you um we have a resolution r-lha-2022-08 a resolution of the Longmont housing authority approving the closing of a loan for financing of the briar wood apartments do we have a presentation quick comments mayor quick comments thank you molly so oh i'm sorry not mayor commissioner peck chair peck members of the commission um molly donnell housing and community investment director i'm glad i'm wearing this because my voice is going downhill tonight so the the existing loan for the briar wood apartments and the former lha administration building that's now housing vcp at 1228 main that loan um had a final balloon payment due in april of this year of 400 and 45 000 and rather than make that payment which would have come out of lha's fund balance and would have been almost equivalent to an entire year of administrative costs that the housing authority also needed to cover with that funding we decided that was um most likely best to bring to you a loan refinance to extend the term for 15 more years with at an interest rate of 4.1 percent no balloon payment provision um and also no prepayment penalty and then additionally it would provide 39 486 dollars in cashback that we'd like to put towards a um replacement reserve for the briar wood apartments that doesn't currently exist and that would be really beneficial for ongoing maintenance needs um this is pretty the timing of this is is one reason why we're bringing this where we finance forward in future years we do expect more development um proceeds to come in developer fee we just didn't we're in that lag that we've talked about before where we um didn't have a ton of developer fee coming in the last couple years so in future years we could um maybe pay off early if that makes sense with developer fee or really plan to use developer fees to plan ahead for these on on similar situations going forward so i think to add to this so when that when the lha originally you know engaged in the loan what was the term on the original i think it was also 15 no it's shorter than that we'd have to confirm yeah we have to confirm the the challenge was they were just making the payments but they they structured the loan where it had a balloon payment and they were not setting aside and again this is pre the city becoming involved so they they weren't set aside setting aside funds to cover the balloon payment which based on where we were and what we were dealing with obviously we then had to just restructure the debt so this one's different in that it doesn't have that balloon payment in this we're just a standard 15-year term correct molly correct without the balloon but we have potential on development revenues to pay it off early whenever you can pay a loan off early it's always a good thing i think so uh do we have any uh questions or comments from council on this now can i have a motion right it's been moved by councilor waters seconded by mayor proteam rudry nope it's been moved by commissioner waters seconded by commissioner uh rodriguez let's vote it's fine the pass is unanimously thank you can i have a motion uh to adjourn city council alright it's been moved by councilor uh hidonga fairing seconded by the commissioner rodriguez it's commissioner hidonga fairing let's vote and that carries unanimously let's take a five-minute break well it's okay i brought one out for myself we are back and we are we are now going to have the zero waste presentation right can you hear me i am bob alan director of operations and public works and natural resources and yes we're here tonight to talk about zero waste and so um zero waste is um even though we have it as one of the four programs that we were directed to work on over the last year and a half now zero waste is kind of in order maybe above everything else because everything else that we do is kind of tiered to aspirations that are really reflected in a zero waste resolution so this is kind of the top we're working on here today and what we have is a draft um what we'd like to do is get comments or feedback on this draft and then bring it back on the consent agenda probably in a month or so at least by early august so that's our our goal so just to give a little context here um this um i kind of like to think of zero waste for our community as a journey that the community the whole community has to take it's not any one group or any one person or just city government it's all of us so um this resolution the first part of it is is kind of a compass for that journey it talks a little bit about the challenges and the constitution of the values of the organization for waste diversion and and kind of sets us up in the direction we want to start heading the second half of this resolution is really kind of a roadmap so it includes the actions or activities that we would have to take as a community to achieve zero waste what we haven't really fleshed out yet is the itinerary for this trip right so we have to make decisions on that tonight this presentation you're going to see starts to speculate a little bit on timing and some of the metrics for zero waste and for waste diversion overall but you heard some comments tonight um there was one in your i think that was emailed and then Naomi a little consternation about you know is this strong enough and what what i wanted to do is let you know that this is our attempt to develop a draft resolution that represents an entire community including those who are going to have to pay for this and those who are going to be a little bit more skeptical about some of the programs and so we didn't want to come here tonight and put words in your mouth about all the things you're going to do but we are more than happy to revise that resolution to be anything that you want it to be so please know that but our what you see tonight in your packet is our attempt to really reflect an entire community so here helping me with this presentation tonight actually doing the heavy lifting is Lisa Knoblock our sustainability program manager and Charles Camines our waste services manager Charlie's kind of here to answer whatever questions you might have about what's going on with our program now in so far as you have any but Lisa's going to do the bulk of the presentation here so with that Lisa thanks Bob can you all hear me okay great Mayor Peck and members of council I'm Lisa Knoblock and the sustainability program manager with strategic integration and thank you all for having us this evening so as Bob mentioned you all had directed us last year to focus and expand work in these four key areas and what I'm going to be discussing with you all tonight is the update to the zero race resolution from 2008 and seeking some direction from you all in next steps so just a bit of an overview of the process so if you all recall City Council passed the original zero waste resolution in 2008 and then we've been directed to update the resolution in particular to include potential targets and possible actions that can help us meet those targets as well as increase the focus and the tie to climate action and particularly look at community impacts and equity considerations and so on the left-hand side of this slide you'll see the outline to the resolution the items that are shown in gray are the elements that from the original resolution some of which were incorporated into the update some of which were adopted slightly and then also the elements in green are really the new pieces that were brought in as you can see those those goals there and some additional specificity around actions and I'll get those into those a little bit later so as Bob mentioned we wanted to draft a resolution that was really reflective of our community and the needs and priorities and within our community and so we went through a stakeholder engagement process with which I'll talk about in a little bit and then we also went through a data analysis process to really look at what are all those potential actions what are the estimated diversion impact from those potential actions to help us understand what material we can really keep out of our landfill and how do we do that and I'll get into some of those details as well and then all of that information not only informs the resolution but the draft universal recycling ordinance which would really get into some of those nitty gritty details of requirements in different sectors and if you direct us to continue to pursue that then that would be the next step and I'll talk about that closer to the end so these are just the guiding principles that we've been following during this process so everybody lives in a clean and safe community increasing access to recycling and composting for all and then reducing waste supports our climate action goals as I mentioned we wanted to draft a resolution that's reflective of our community and so we've gone through a pretty extensive stakeholder engagement process so that we can really understand the needs and priorities of not only our community but our city staff any barriers and opportunities that folks see what are some equity considerations that we need to be mindful of and so on so we met with a number of city staff we met with key boards we met with a number of external economic development and commercial partners and then also a number of community groups and residents as well and then all of that informs what you see in the resolution that Bob spoke to earlier in terms of reflecting what are those barriers and what are those opportunities so we worked with a consultant to do a data analysis as well they started with the two scenarios that we modeled in the waste lifecycle analysis that we did in 2020 that helped inform our understanding of what the impact waste consumption has on our greenhouse gas emissions and that's what they used as a starting point so they conducted residential and commercial surveys to help us understand and really get a sense of how does our community value some of the different potential actions that we might pursue in terms of increasing our waste diversion they also modeled more than 50 actions for their diversion impact so to really understand what is that low hanging fruit what are those items that have the most impact in terms of again keeping that material out of our landfill and then they rolled all of that into a triple bottom line analysis to really evaluate the environmental the economic and the social costs associated with all of those actions and then they looked at what are the actions that align most with our community priorities and also diversion impact and they bundled those into both near term and long term packages in the residential commercial and construction and demolition sectors and I'll talk a little about that a bit let's excuse me a little bit about that in just a second and then that's really what was taken to inform the potential targets that were included in the resolution that you will see so this slide has a lot going on and hopefully you can see it better on your screens but this graph really shows of all of those actions that were modeled where do they fall in terms of their potential diversion impact and I do want to note that these are modeled under like really ideal conditions so there are a lot of things that would need to be in place there's a lot of measures that we would really need to hit benchmarks we would need to hit to get to this diversion impact but it does give you that sense of what really has the highest impact from a diversion standpoint and as you can see there's really a handful at the top that have the biggest impact that's really focused on recycling and composting in the commercial sector revising our residential services and then focusing on construction and demolition I do want to acknowledge that those actions really listed at the top that have the highest diversion impact also have the highest cost that are going to be borne by the generator and that's primarily due to the fact that you're talking about introducing new collection services so recycling or composting and we just want to be mindful of that impact because we know that folks are facing increasing rates and fees across many areas in our community right now all right I need to just take a breath for a second that's a lot of information to cover okay so this slide as I mentioned in the data analysis we looked at packages near-term and long-term packages in each of these sectors so the commercial, residential and construction and demolition sectors the items noted in white are what tentatively we identified as potential near-term actions and those in dark blue are those identified as potential long-term actions and in order to help establish potential targets for the resolution we identified near-term as being implemented between now and 2030 and long-term as being implemented between 2030 and 2050 primarily because those timelines are consistent with other sustainability timelines however that really when we come back with the final resolution as Bob mentioned those can change based on the direction that you all give us tonight so the actions listed within each of these sectors are listed in descending order of descending diversion impact so those at the top are the ones that have the higher potential diversion impact and those toward the bottom have the lower potential diversion impact and then those percentages at the top really say that if we were to implement all of the actions in each of these sectors the potential increased diversion that we could reach again under those ideal conditions are an additional 24% diversion in the commercial sector 14% in the residential sector and 5% in the construction and demolition construction demolition sector we do have the diversion impact and cost and triple bottom line information for all of these actions so we can move them around we can remove them entirely really based on the direction that we get from council and then what you see in the resolution is more generalized statements that's really again reflective of that community input but that essentially capture these types of actions just not necessarily with this level of specificity so sorry for the formatting going on there I don't know what's happening so essentially if all of those actions in all of those sectors were to be implemented on whatever time frame council gives us direction to do the modeling shows that we could potentially increase our diversion rate from the existing 36% that's our current diversion rate to 70% by 2030 and 85% by 2050 and then that's also broken out into sector specific targets for 2030 and 2050 as well again based on that data analysis so that's the bulk of the information I have to share with you I want to pause for any questions comments or other discussion from council and then I have a couple more sides to wrap up councilor Yorba thank you mayor so I have a few questions so how many do you know how many participants you had in the survey oh that is a really that is a great question and I'm not going to have that off the top of my head I can get that for you what I can tell you is the consultants that we worked with have a lot of experience in developing statistically significant surveys and I do know that we hit the threshold to get that rate of statistical significance in the residential and commercial sector but I don't remember off the top of my head what those responsibilities were okay thank you yeah I would like to see if you can get that to me I have a question but in oddly enough I just put on an event on Father's Day for Juneteenth and I had a few vendors pull out because of the zero waste in compostable and I required that for the event so and that's wonderful and great but what are we doing or incentivizing these small businesses well we know that these items are very expensive businesses of color who are starting or you know just a small business and can't afford that so are we incentivizing these small businesses to get them give them the opportunity to still provide you know compostable product you know items to be able to afford it and also to be able to make money as well because if not we're going to have the people who are and there's nothing wrong I'm grateful for all those who attended but it makes me think about those small businesses you know that are saying no I can't do that because it costs me three times the amount of just regular plastic you know again that's more education and I also want to thank Charlie for actually training my volunteers he says Shakita this is what you need to do so I do want to give you kudos and thank you for giving me a list because that's important education is important you know and not only did he train he came out to make sure I did it right too just kudos but that's a concern for me and granted I'm 100% with the plan but what about those we're leaving behind yeah absolutely thank you for that question councilmember Yarborough so I'll talk about this a little bit in the in one of the next slides but that that next piece is really looking at if council directs us to continue to look at the universal recycling ordinance that's where those requirements would come into place for the business community and our next steps would be to do that targeted outreach to understand if we are to pass an ordinance what are the incentives that we would need to put in place so that we're not burdening particularly our small businesses our BIPOC owned businesses and to really understand what that impact is before we pass that ordinance so that we know how to support folks and moving toward that or how do we face face things in so that we give folks a significant enough runway to get there we also know that there's some state legislation that was passed that's going to impact folks in our community and that gives us an opportunity also to help set folks up for that transition and then as an aside we have some grant money from the county for this year to specifically focus on some of the participants in the sustainable business program to do essentially to go where program so that we can understand what is that cost impact to businesses is what's that differential and how do we support folks in moving forward in that transition and then what's the long-term support that's needed for folks to continue with that and hopefully over time those materials will become cheaper but we know right now they're not and that's a reality and we want to understand that so that's really part of the next phase that we would want to understand if we pursue that so that we know what all of those impacts are and that we can put things into place to mitigate that it is yeah yeah one of our staff members their family runs a small business too so we know she gives us a lot of that information of it's just not feasible for a lot of folks even prior to COVID but obviously COVID even more of an impact on folks and I think you know then once you can understand that then we have to bring that into the rate models to then understand what we're going to do in order to generate the funds so that you can incentivize or you can do this because you also have to generate the revenue necessary to do that it's not that we just have that revenue available so that then has to be folded into our rate conversations yeah Councilor Hidalgo-Farring that's okay try it again yes thank you mayor so I'm glad that you had included the Green Star Schools and having that goal in our community you know I've been in contact with some folks and with Charlie over here about so when COVID hit we were told in our buildings that the Green Star program would be on hold I think we were we were doing recycling and and just regular trash pickup but the composting was on hold so my understanding was when we came back full time was that we would continue with the composting and what I'm learning is that there are several schools in our district who are designated Green Star Schools whose principles have opted to not do composting so that you know when we look at what are some of the big areas that would make the most impact is that commercial composting so you know I really want to so when I when hearing constituents say we need more forceful language I heartily I agree with that I strongly agree with that because when given the opportunity people go for the easier route what is very frustrating to me as a teacher who's been in a school where we did the composting even our littles our preschool kindergartners were understanding picking it up and and they were on it now we're gonna have to reteach the whole thing and so it it becomes very frustrating and in the end it's actually more work and more waste that we are producing so I would be all for having more stronger stronger terms in our language especially when we are working with entities that actually are with of means so I want to do more outreach and and offer more grant you know if we have grant opportunities to incentivize our smaller businesses are more marginalized groups to have those opportunities for them we have other companies and entities that are with means they can do it and that I would I would like to see you know a resolution come back that really addresses those key factors thank you thank you I think I'll chime in so I like all of these suggestions and I agree with them but I do understand that businesses this is an expense to them and they may have already ordered for a certain amount of time their service their plates their whatever it is they're using so we need to take into account their inventory and that that isn't going to be thrown away it's going to be used so I would like to see timelines on when we would like the conversion from plastic to compostable to be done and the and of course the incentives to do that but if we have five or six years for the turnover then there would be it would be more palatable and businesses can plan the other things that I do think it should be in ordinance when it comes to waste diversion I would also like to see some kind of a plan or a timeline for carriers third-party carriers like western disposal to pick up recyclables and compostables if it's if it's possible and that's going to have to be some research as to what are other cities doing what are other carriers doing and some carriers are already doing that so it isn't impossible I know that it would be a hardship on whoever they're picking this up from apartment buildings somebody's going to incur that cost and I don't know what the timeline is but I would I would like that to be on the table as well and I think we've talked about this several times in the past during these some of these updates I don't expect everything to be done in two years it isn't going to happen it's too it's too onerous on businesses to do that so there are some low-hanging fruits like for me a big one is plastic bags in grocery stores again they order their inventory so they get bulk they buy in bulk so the research would have to be what is amenable what would really work for a grocery store to convert and some already do anyway it's just big ones that really don't want to go there so they do need to be pushed so I don't know what else the low-hanging fruit is but I'm sure you do and I agree with Councillor Hidalgo-Ferring that we need to make stronger terms you know 85% depending upon the timeline and who it is and what the what the issue is is it going to be plastic bags it's going to be compostable restaurant where whatever you want to call it so I think we need to take that resolution back and possibly look at those things and have a discussion about where we can go what the timelines would be and what kind of incentives if possible so that's it Mayor Peck yeah the got a lot of things spinning through my head here so most of the things that that were discussed here in the last few minutes are things that we cannot compel businesses to do unless we pass ordinances and that's where this will really take place the resolution is truly just kind of pointing the boat I'm not sure that I would advise putting a lot of if you want an itinerary in there we'll put it in there and and there is a little bit of that in there already so we could add more of that in there and I'm hearing stronger support for things the other thing I wanted to mention and to follow up on what Harold said is that the city's way services program is really just once again a residential program and its rate right now the rates that we collect based on how those were approved and bypassed councils can only be used for that program so the only thing that we have for any kind of incentives assistance or anything is that waste management fee which is $2.96 per account so that's not a lot of money to work with as a matter of fact even even to start working on some of these programs will require staff support that I don't know where that would come from right now so we'll have to figure that out as well but I just want to make that clear that until and unless we come back and we start talking about rates and fees there isn't really anything to work with here other than what we currently have which is pretty fully allocated to trash in the parks or outreach programs and things of that nature so first steps are going to have to be looking at ordinances and the timing for those and the appetite for those in the community and then coming right on the heels of that we'll have to start looking at ways if we want the city to do assistance for some of this that we'll have to look at different fees for that that we don't currently have in place okay thank you for that and and what I heard was mostly commercial and and retail not necessary residential I don't know if it can happen but I do think that we need to look at it and see what can be done if anything so if I if I can kind of extrapolate a little bit what I what I heard you say is look at commercial requirements I think you know naturally my mind would go into a complete analysis of that to say if we did this here's what the cost burden would be sort of fully lining it out in terms of impact cost and those things and then as we looked at incentives sort of doing the same thing to give you a sense of what that impact will be either on individuals or businesses associated with these individual approaches is that what you want us to bring back to you yes but to be honest I I think that I would like to find what the low hanging fruit would be not the whole overwhelming umbrella of different types of recycling or just what you would what you would say would be the low hanging fruit you want to speak to that though or Charlie thank you Bob Mayor Peck and Council this slide here does represent what that low hanging fruit does look like from the analysis from our consultant so if you look and you see up at the top there commercial recycling and commercial organics and pays you through incentivizing installing a pays you throw in the commercial area to help incentivize the diversion so those up there and and C and D disposals up there as well but single family embedded compost is one of those so there's really those top four bars across the top that can bring the lower hanging fruit as you would say and then as you go down that bar that you know those are the more more expensive per ton approaches yeah and most of those really would relate to passing parts or all of the universal recycling ordinance so that's on our work plan and I think that our work plan stacks up really well is coming right behind the resolution so the resolution sets the aspirations I think what we're hearing tonight is let's get some stronger language in there so if that's good to hear that from you because that helps us then go that full distance on that I think we can take that step first and then I think the next step is going to be what's on our work plan already which is the URO and and even if that's phased in or you know we do that in pieces that look as you say Mayor Peck at the kind of the easier lower hanging fruit first and then phase in maybe harder elements of it down the road exactly so um Councillor Waters thanks Mayor Peck Bob as you're describing I don't know what all is in your work plan but as that as you know what your you know target dates are or timelines is is it is should we assume that is whether however far down you go on that that list of fruit right those bars there's a cost estimate I mean that's this is what Harold was suggesting kind of lining out what's that total cost going to be who's going to pay or where the the resources to cover those costs going to come from how much of that translates into rate increases for whom right are we going to if that's what you're going to come back with if that's what you're in your work plan I guess this is a question of Harold are we going to see that when we're looking all the other rate increases we're going to have to consider for 2023 because I because I have to tell you I will it's hard to me for me to envision voting for rate increases somewhere without seeing the rate increases everywhere so we can set priorities and if we're going to get feedback from the community let's get the feedback on here's what it's going to cost you to live in Longmont next year here the benefits both to quality of life and the environment but here's the cost and here's who's going to pay for it and if we're going to create incentives who where is that money going to come from and who's going to benefit so we get a real clear picture of cost and benefit for everybody yes mayor and council the the first steps we're really looking at would be a policy change such as a URO we have talked and in fact I know the mayor asked us urged us to start looking at rates on the way services program at the end of this year but we wouldn't anticipate changes there until next year those are going to have much lesser impact on the program areas that are these low hanging fruit areas but it will at some point have to have some impact particularly if we want to build in fees or other things that build those assistance programs but it is it is lining up to where you're going to have a number of these coming at you concurrently if we don't stagger them and you're not comfortable with staggering them in a way that the community finds you know palatable so that that issue is out there yeah well at the end of the day you know the they're the ones who are going to pay for it and us these members of the community and I I just my concern is doing things one off and then oh then we it's like well I wish I'd known then what we're being considered asked to consider you know at some time in the future when we know all that's coming so I just think I think that's an expectation that community ought to have of us so that we get a the gestalt of what the total cost are going to be that's actually been some of the conversations we've had I mean you know we've started that move where we brought water and electric together stormwater went off so we talked about that last time in that conversation we talked about the fact that electrics we're going to have to have an electric discussion because of an adjustment with PRPA so there will always be components based on water rises but I think what I've talked to Becky about is how do we give you a holistic look of what are the rates going to look like and what are the pressures on the rates and what do we have to do like the environmental requirements that we have to do in wastewater and how does that start stacking on to here's what we have to do and start layering these components and I think yeah we need to give you that full look at all of this okay mayor peck councilmember roder we do try to bring you know those utility rate impacts as packages annually but I think it's you know also important to recognize the the economic environment in which we are currently operating and how we expect costs to increase over the next few years so I think that's that's a real concern obviously you know we don't have all of the relevant information across all services but there are some projections that we can make so that that may be information that we can provide when we are looking to adopt rate increases changes in rates for this year although we would expect rate impacts for residential customers from from these changes to be adopted within 2023 for 2024 and and once again it doesn't mean that we would adopt these it just means can you bring it back and let us know what we're looking at right that's how we interpret it yeah and to give you a sense of what Becky's talking about you know so a lot of the questions we could answer we're in budget and development the big theme now is the cost increases I mean really kind of dominating our budget conversations in terms of the pressures that we're just seeing across the board and and so that is a different thing in play in terms of how we look at what we have available in our budgets as well okay great thank you do you want to continue Lisa yeah and just just to add to that and as I mentioned in that data analysis process we we did identify with the consultant high level cost per ton of each of those strategies and who is who is the generator that would pay for those costs and so we have a good foundation you know as Bob said as we move into these different pieces to do that deeper level analysis that that Harold's talking about as well so just the next steps based on your feedback tonight we'll finalize the resolution and bring it back to you as Bob said in the next month or so and then I do think that we're hearing but want to confirm that you all do want us to continue to pursue drafting any universal recycling ordinance doing that outreach getting the information that we can and then bringing that back to you for further discussion and review as well so I just want to confirm that you all want us to continue with that process great and so our timeline oops sorry no that's okay okay I was just going to say so our timeline for that currently and this is keeping with the the timeline that you all have given us for those four directives that we talked about at the beginning would be to have a draft resolution back to you all for review and discussion by the end of the year so just remind me we have an opt out compost program okay no opt in opt in opt in yes I was hoping it would be opt out and and that's entirely up to you when we look at rates again as I've said before the opt out option is kind of that ship's kind of sailed but it would be embedded fee which is I think now what you saw in the newspaper in Denver yes yes okay great all right well I think we have everything we need thank you all so much for your time of course our counselor waters thanks Mayor Peck just I'm just I guess I'm would wonder with the council the conversation about zero waste ordinance I've kind of been assuming that by the end of the year we would see a zero waste ordinance so I'm not I don't have any concerns about that but I do wonder about sequencing I however much cost is embedded you know in the provisions in that ordinance would it make any sense or could you before you write before somebody spends time drafting an ordinance and then go we go you know what that requires from legal and on your part to kind of lay out what would what would be what would be reflected in an ordinance and what the cost and benefits were and who's going to pay before we actually get into writing an ordinance wouldn't I mean just in terms of the sequencing of this it would make sense to me it seems before you spend all the time to write an ordinance to get clear on what do we really want and then have and then direct that into an ordinance so we don't they don't waste time or or maybe there's a way to think about it that I that I just don't understand yes Mayor and council precisely we I mean there a universal ordinance for recycling couldn't take so many different forms and I think we would want to vet we I mean we've laid the groundwork already with this research and work with our consultant for that ordinance it really comes down to what do we want to start with what impact you want to have on the community unfortunately there's a lot of discussion yet to be had on all of that and it's I can't think of any other way other than sitting here in a study session and going through that at the right time we've promised to try to bring something back in December but we may have to have a few discussions to get there so let us go back and look at that make sense of all the information we've already collected and see what things we think we can recommend keeping in mind that the first level of impact isn't really going to be rates or anything like that it's going to be ordinance potential ordinance impacts on the community and that's where we need to understand and not not be burdensome to them but also move this needle on zero ways thanks thank you for that I totally agree lots more communication thank you very much this was informative and thanks for listening to us thank you have a good night we're now at final call public be invited to be hurt are we we've got to be bored and commission oh we do you're right which is why we needed Marsha we do and it looks like she may have taken a break do we want to wait a few minute moments till Marsha is available there I I think she's here she's just off camera so councilwoman Martin hello we're going to do the board and commission interviews I'm sorry not interviews we've already done those if you'd like me you're are you ready I'm ready I can walk you through these okay we had this year 32 vacancies 27 applications this year what was different as you all know is the boards participated in a pre-interview process and helped recommend to you all to narrow that field of applicants per your previous direction so you all conducted interviews just a couple days ago on Saturday in the packet we created we included the list of vacancies the list of eligible applicants and included the recommendation memos from the board so because council member Martin is remote we will need to do these by motion and vote so the first one is art and public places commission this list is in your packet I have it in front of me there are five regular member vacancies one unexpired member and you have your recommendations from the staff liaison thank you so mayor would you like me to read the names of the applicants or would you like to ask for a motion what how would you for there are six applicants six seats the the board recommended that the one Catherine Cox be pointed to the museum advisory board but you all could do whatever you like I think because it is a public meeting that we should probably read the names of the applicants okay and then the liaison will hopefully make a motion okay sounds great so the two incumbents are Pamela bachelor Susan horror or three I'm sorry Susan Horowitz and Cindy Tiger are already current board members reapplying and then the new applicants are Catherine Cox Melanie Nieske pardon my pronunciation and Nettie Penman Councilor Hidalgo-Faring thank you mayor yeah as Lee liaison well it's I'm not art in public places I'm museum so that's right so it would be you are you the art in public places okay so I'm gonna withdraw my my motion Councilor Yarbrough all right so I make a motion that Pamela bachelor Susan Horowitz Melanie Nieske Nettie Penman and Cindy Tiger be on the board the commission of art in public places and Catherine Cox go to museum advisory board I'll second that is there any discussion from counselors seeing none oh go ahead a counselor waters I'm gonna I'm gonna recuse myself or the term I'm gonna say thank you having not participated in the interviews not because I'm not interested I just I was occupied on Saturday so I'm not I'm interested in her serves but but having not been in the interviews I won't vote on any of them yes on any of them thank you so um let's vote and if you could raise your hands mayor just so that would be good counselor Martin we're going to raise our hands to vote all those in favor of those appointees for the art in public places raise your hand councilmember Martin did you hear the motion can you raise your hand I I cannot see the voting screen we are voting by hand we're going to raise our hands since I'm up here and I can't run your motion oh yeah so the motion that councilmember Yarbrough made is to appoint Pamela Batchelor Susan Horowitz Melanie Nisky Nettie Penman and Cindy Tiger to the art and public places commission and then to appoint Catherine Cox to the museum so in favor so all those in favor and councilmember Waters we accusing so that that that past staining that passed with counselor waters abstaining as Don had said very good moving on to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals there are four vacancies two regular member vacancies one two or I'm sorry one unexpired alternate and the one applicant Laura Howe who is a current board member so she's reapplying so I interviewed her so I will move that we appoint Laura Howe to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and just to clarify to a regular member term correct yes to a full term okay full term okay all those in favor raise your hand councilmember Martin were you in favor of that Laura Howe for Board of Adjustment yes thank you great so that passes with our counselor waters abstaining the downtown development authority has two vacancies for terms ending 2026 and two current board members reapplying Wes Parker and James Wardell both recommended so that's been moved by councilor Yarbrough seconded by Mayor Protea Maradrikas let's vote on that raise your hands if you're in favor thank you that passes with counselor waters abstaining thank you moving on to the golf course advisory board two unexpired regular member terms ending December with 31 2024 three applicants rick unconscious Howard Reagan and Phillip Schluckelbier the board recommended appointing rick unconscious and Phillip Schluckelbier and then holding off on Howard when new vacancies come up at the end of the year that was a recommendation Mayor Protea Rodriguez thank you Mayor Peck I interviewed as the previous liaison council member waters is currently liaison to the golf advisory board I agreed with the recommendations from the board so I would like to move that rick unconscious and Phillip Schluckelbier be appointed to the two unexpired regular member terms ending December 30 verse 2024 so it's been moved by Mayor Protea Maradrikas seconded by councilor Yarbrough let's vote raise your hand please so that passes unanimously with councilor Waters abstaining thank you very much historic preservation commission has won unexpired alternate member term ending December 31st 2025 two applicants Douglas Barnard Barnard and Herbert Fenster the board board interview or recommended both of those for interview so really is council's decision so that is I'm sorry Mayor Protea Maradrikas thank you Mayor Peck I am the liaison to historic preservation commission as noted the commission did not have a preference so when I looked at it from my opinion from the interviews they both had outstanding resumes one candidate had appeared to do more homework as far as the mission of the commission if you will as well as previous decisions and items brought forth to the commission so in that regard I would like to nominate I move Douglas Barnard as the one unexpired alternate member term ending December 31st 2025 second so it's been moved by Mayor Protea Maradrikas seconded by Councilor Hedoggle-Ferring let's vote and that passes with with councilor Waters abstaining excellent thank you on the MOPC pension board we have one vacancy for a regular member term two applicants one would one that withdrew Travis Green as your remaining applicant and I believe he emailed you wasn't able to I think he missed the interview so it's up to you all so that was my interview so I move that we appoint Travis Green yeah Travis Green to the MOPC pension board for a regular term so it's been seconded by Mayor Protea Maradrikas let's vote that passes with Councilor Waters abstaining thank you museum advisory board has three regular member term vacancies ending June 30th 2025 three applicants Linda Bucksbaum Catherine Cox who you've already handled in a prior motion and Ray Moriarty Ray is a current board member so is reapplying Councilor Hedoggle-Ferring okay so I would move to appoint Linda Bucksbaum and Ray Moriarty for her second term and as well as the addition of Catherine Cox to the museum advisory board for three regular terms ending in June 30th 2025 great so that's been moved by Councilor Hedoggle-Ferring seconded by Councilor Yarbrough let's vote so that passes with Councilor Waters abstaining just a couple more to go and we're almost there sustainable sustainability advisory board three regular member terms ending June 30th 2025 three applicants Ralph Groswald Michelle Mendieta Roth and Mary Lynn Mary Lynn is a current board member reapplying for her seat I did so I interviewed these three and I moved that we reappoint all three of them to the regular uh terms any June 30th 2025 that's been uh seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez let's vote just waiting for Councilmember Martin did you hear that motion Councilmember Martin yes I heard I am waiting to vote no oh okay vote no okay all right so that passes with all those all those in favor raise your hand please all those against okay so that passes with our Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez myself Councilor Yarbrough Councillors Hedoggle Faring voting for and Councilor Martin voting against and Councilor Waters abstaining last one transportation advisory board two regular member terms ending June 30th 2025 you have three applicants John Koh Patrick Hinterberger and Taylor Wicklund the board recommended two in particular Taylor Wicklund and Patrick Hinterberger so that's been moved by Councilor Yarbrough seconded by Councilor Hedoggle Faring let's vote all those in favor and that passes with Councilor Waters abstaining thank you very much Mayor and Council thank you so now we are at the final call public invited to be heard is there anybody in the public that's doing something weird it's not on some agendas and it's on others okay okay that's why you didn't see it and I did I didn't see it either so is that it on the agenda then except we have Mr we have one public invited to be heard Paul Tiger Paul Tiger 350 Kimbark and what is that I don't know if people saw my letter in the editor that appeared in the paper today I know that it's a heavy reading time for you so you might not have caught that so what's happening is is that road signage companies are storing signs in the downtown area this is not new when I was a merchant on Main Street that was happening and I actually used to Tom Street came over one day and we picked up this giant metal sign that was right in front of my storefront window and moved it somewhere else and we found that and I found more recently that there aren't construction no we do have construction going on on Main at Long Mountain View but they're a plethora of signs right after Havana Manor paid their lot a sign appeared the next morning big sign takes a couple of people to move these signs there was one over the weekend on the lawn of High Plains Bank that said double fines for speeding in a work zone I didn't see the work zone well it's obvious that they're not there they're just storing them in town and I believe that Jim Angstead and some other people are going to get together with me and see what we can get done about that but as I was out with some pals the other night and I said you see all these signs and they said tons of signs no construction we're waiting it's going to be big but let's hope not so that's all if you see them that they belong to someone and they've parked them in our downtown area in parking spaces on residential sidewalks and they're really amusing looking until you want a parking space thank you very much by the way I did write in my editorial that this wasn't your responsibility thank you I've come just to tell you about it but folks who walk in the downtown area have seen it and maybe wondered the alley that used to be behind my business has got a string of construction ahead signs okay thank you very much thank you Paul oh by the way I didn't come for all of the recycling event waste diversion our waste diversion manager so I wanted you to know that Longmont was recycling foam plastic before anybody else we've done a lot of firsts here and I hope we continue thank you so we are at the end of our meeting do we have any mayor and council comments I see Councillor Yarbrough thank you mayor I just wanted to say I appreciate all those who came out for the Juneteenth that was our first in-person Juneteenth celebration in the park at Roseville park and I just want to thank the community for showing up and thank you councilwoman Susie Hidalgo-Fairing for showing up and with your support I really appreciate that that means a lot to me and also I want to just mention that we all know that there's a lot going on in the world and freedom of speech and everything I just want to make sure that as community leaders and as community members that it is it's not appropriate to destroy property in our city so graffiti although you want to speak and have freedom of speech we understand that but please respect the property and respect the neighborhoods in our community so I just wanted to to mention that and say that because we're a long month and we are the example so I just wanted to say that and thank you thank you do we have any um city manager remarks no comments mayor council well counselor I'm sorry thanks for pointing that out Eugene counselor Martin thank you mayor peck I just want to thank the council and the staff for allowing me to participate remotely during a very difficult time and I wanted to express my appreciation that's all thank you take care marsha city attorney remarks no comments mayor thank you I move that we adjourn the meeting all those in favor bye thank you good evening