 Good afternoon everyone and welcome to the 2023 Longmont City Council debates produced by Longmont Public Media in partnership with the League of Women Voters and sponsored by Sustainable Resilient Longmont. This is the Ward 1 debate and I am your host Faith Halverson Ramos. In alphabetical order from left to right are candidates Diane Christ, Harrison Earl, and Nea Wasink. I will call on each candidate to give a one-minute opening statement and we ask that the audience remain silent during the debate and make sure that your phone is off or in airplane mode. So candidate Christ your opening statement. Thank you Faith. I'm Diane Christ your Ward 1 candidate. In 2021 I brought you the Hyperloop. As the Vice Chair of Longmont's Transportation Board we initiated Vision Zero and a privately run microtransit program within the city. My focus this year is bringing back the Longmont we love. I would like the city to rent blighted buildings for expanded recreation and library services. That way bringing it to multiple neighborhoods. Every ward has at least one large empty building. Placing city services and community commercial centers will build area business and a sense of community. Mead is building an RV park on Highway 66. Attracting these tourism dollars to north Longmont businesses must be a priority in the next year. As a business development accountant and budget expert my knowledge and expertise is needed on the council at this time. Our taxpayer approved 2021 projects have been stalled due to inflation. We need to put off voting on any new projects until the actual costs are understood. Thank you candidate Earl. Thank you Faith and hello everyone. My name is Harrison Earl and I'm running for city council to push for an affordable livable and sustainable Longmont. I've lived in Longmont for the past six years and I love it here. I know what a special place this is and I know how much that all of us believe that. My wife Elizabeth is a family medicine physician at Salud Family Health Centers here in town. Together with our Golden Doodle Maximus we enjoy exploring Longmont's trails, greenways and recognize what a tremendous asset they along with our parks are for the community. I've worked in the aviation industry for the last 15 years. Currently I work as a consultant helping airports around the country and I've used that experience to help Longmont being appointed to the airport advisory board five years ago and I've been serving as chair for the last three years. I've worked hard to bring economic benefits to our city and we're collaboratively with our city staff to all of our benefit. Should I be elected? I pledge to represent not a specific party or special interest but all of the residents of Longmont. I'll serve with honesty, integrity and respect and promise to bring common sense to a city council. I'm really proud to run so that I can fight for an affordable livable and sustainable Longmont. Thank you all so much. Thank you. Candidate Wasink. Thank you Faith and thanks LPM and League of Women Voters for helping facilitate this and SRL for sponsoring. My name is Nia Wasink. My pronouns are she, her and I am honored to be running for your award one city council representative. I've spent my entire career in service to my community. I worked directly in nonprofits and then started my own consulting firm supporting nonprofits. We do strategic planning, governance, fundraising and help build capacity. Through that work we kept having clients that came up with the same problems over and over again. There's only so much we can do in direct service. We need policy solutions to help serve our community. That's why I'm running for your Longmont City Council. I want to ensure that we have a Longmont where people find inclusion, belonging, where we can foster diversity and we can ensure that everybody can thrive. Thank you for your statements. Next I will read the rules of the debate and ask the first question of candidate Diane Christ. The candidate on the left will be asked the first question which they have one minute to answer. When the answer is finished or their one minute is up, each of the other participants has 30 seconds to rebut or extend the first answer. Rebuttals move left to right beginning on the answer's right and moving round robin. When all candidates have spoken, the candidate to the answer's right becomes the next answerer. I will then ask a new question of the next answerer and rebuttals proceed as before. At the 25 minute mark, the current round of question and rebuttals is completed and the lightning round begins. In the lightning round, each candidate answers the same question with a one word answer. Five questions will be asked and we'll start from right to left for the first question, left to right for the second question for the lightning round. When the lightning round is over, the second half of the debate begins. It proceeds as the same as the first round except the first answerer will be the right most candidate, Nia, and the round robin proceeds right to left. At the 55 minute mark, the debate ends after the current round of question and rebuttals is completed. I will then call on the candidates right to left to make a one minute closing statement. So to begin, I'll choose our first question that will first be answered by candidate Chris and then answered by candidate Earl. So our first question is, should the city spend taxpayer money on lawsuits in pursuit of changes in state law? Should the city sign on to public actions brought by other jurisdictions? Well, that's an interesting question, Faith. I believe that government is a servant, not a master. And as council members, we're here to administrate taxpayer intent and dollars in ways that represent the citizens of Longmont. I do exactly this as a business consultant with the businesses I represent. And I will be a good steward of your hard earned dollars. Government should do for individuals what they cannot do for themselves. And luckily, we are very capable people. If we did everything our US Constitution demands of us, life would be beautiful indeed. It's not the role of city council to run contrary to other laws, and especially not the supreme law of the land. So I would say following other municipalities and other initiatives against laws is not a good use of taxpayer dollars. Thank you. Candidate Earl. Well, thank you. It's hard to talk in these hypotheticals and generalities, but I do think there's some cases where the city needs to stand up and support what's right and fight for that. Sometimes that means doing things like lawsuits or joining other municipalities. But I also think it's really important to recognize the fact that when a city is taking that action, we're spending all of our money as taxpayers to support those lawyers and those legal fees. And so it really needs to be deliberate and done when it is prudent and in the best interest of all of us. Thank you. Candidate Wassink. Yeah, I would just extend what Harrison has said and agree it's hard in a hypothetical situation to say any kind of blanket statement. I think every opportunity we have to support and protect our community members we should take. And we need to evaluate each opportunity to ensure that it's providing the most good for the people of Longmont. If that does require a lawsuit or extending with other jurisdictions, then we absolutely should be doing that. Thank you. Our next question will be answered first by candidate Earl, followed by candidate Wassink. What would you do to enlist residents of Longmont more in keeping our city crime free? So I'd start by saying I really support the work that our public safety department does overall. I've had a chance to sit down with the public safety chief, the police chief and the fire chief and respect the work that they and their staff do. I think it's really important that our public safety staff is integrated into the community, that they're trusted by members of the community, that they are at events like so many of them were in the community last night, that they're engaging with nonprofits, they're in the community organizations, so that people recognize them not as an outside law enforcement, but as Longmonters and as people who they trust and can go to. And I think that trust is where we start so that we can bring people in the room, people willing to stand up and help work collaboratively to make sure that the city is a very safe place for all of us. Thank you, candidate Wassink. I think community based solutions are actually one of the most effective ways we can address some of the safety concerns. I'm going to take the example of Lanyon Park. In that case, the neighborhood was concerned about safety. And the park began to fall into disrepair. Together with our community services team at the city, the neighborhood came together, started bringing programming back started revitalizing that area and reclaiming that park for the neighborhood. Those are the kinds of solutions that are really based in community building. Thank you. Our next question will be one. Oh, I'm sorry. Oh my gosh. Apologies, candidate Chris. So we need a better police presence in neighborhoods. Currently only one of our police officers lives in Longmont. And the police officer should be prioritized for attainable housing, so that they doesn't necessarily have to be our officers, but just a public safety officer, you know, like a state patrol or from another town. Their presence in a community will help inhibit crime. Thank you. Now our next question will first be answered by candidate Wasink followed by candidate Chris. And that question is the mayor typically represents Longmont on the board of the Platte River Power Authority. But any council member may be appointed to serve on the board. If you were a board member, would you work to reduce PRPA's investment in generation facilities that burn fossil fuels? Yes, absolutely. PRPA's goal on going fully renewable by 2030 is a really important one for us to maintain. And obviously PRPA has a number of different municipalities paying into it. I think whether or not as a council person, I sit on the board, we all have a role to play in talking to them about some of the strategies for the 100% renewable goal. We have some significant outreach that needs to happen with our community members. We're talking about serious behavior change and how we actually utilize energy in our homes. So that's the kind of work that I would love to be engaged with actually talking to community members talking about their needs and ensuring that they're really fully educated on what this energy transition means for us. Thank you, candidate Chris. The truth is that parts of Longmont are underpowered electrically. And some of that is in Ward one where the neighborhoods were built in the 1980s. In talking with electrify Longmont, the truth is that they cannot go coal free by 2030. And it's questionable whether they can make it by 2040. So I think we have to ease out of this and we have to be patient. Change takes time sometimes. And also, sometimes arrives on its own schedule. Thank you. Candidate Earl. I think it's really important that we do continue on the path with PRPA to reduce investment in generation of fossil fuels and move towards carbon zero generation by 2030. I also think it's very important that we do so in a way that doesn't overburden our residents or ratepayers with significant rate increases that we continue investments in things like efficiency works that provides rebates and provides resources to people so that we're all prepared for that transition and can do so in a way that's fair and equitable to all of us. Thank you. Our next question will be first asked, answered by candidate Chris. And that question is, do you believe that density increases for infill development should be limited to a percentage of density over adjacent neighborhoods? Hmm. She's asking me a math question. It's fun. I think I think there's a couple of issues here. For one, the city has a housing inclusion or inclusionary housing measure of 12% on on high density housing or actually on all housing development. And so I think there's the push sometimes to build more units. But I also think that neighborhoods should be considered in terms of the style and contiguousness to the development. It seems like 10 years ago, we were building apartment complexes that very easily fit into the neighborhood. Now I see see some that are starkly in contrast to the neighborhood. We need to work to where everyone is satisfied. Like I said, government is a servant, not a master. And our citizens all need to be satisfied with their neighborhoods. Thank you. Candidate Erl. Thank you. My number one issue in my campaign is housing affordability. And I think it's really important to recognize that one of the ways we're going to bring down housing prices is to build more housing. And that does involve more density. Now I don't think that we should have a hard and fast rule about density as a percentage, but I'd like to look at what the infrastructure is nearby. So we're able to go denser along some of our major arterial streets, like Main Street, like pace or 17th. And we're not going as dense in neighborhoods or where the infrastructure, transportation and resources aren't there. Thank you. Candidate Wasink. I'd really like to uplift the recent charrette process that took place for the Bon Farm development. It was an opportunity for the neighborhood to come to the table and say, here are concerns with the design, the density, any kind of changes that they were expecting to experience in their neighborhood, and the developers to come to the table with what their needs were. And through that came about with a compromise that was presented in the concept plan. Those kinds of processes of community engagement and finding compromises is where we really need to go in terms of our density discussions. Thank you. Our next question will be first answered by candidate Earl. And it is, should Longmont change all residential zoning to mixed use? Why or why not? So it's a I think kind of a loaded question. No, I don't think we should change all residential zoning to mixed use. Should we change some residential zoning to mixed use? Yes. Should there be multiple types of mixed use that have different densities associated with them? Again, depending on the infrastructure? Yes. I think it's really important that we do build more housing in Longmont. And I think that means densifying our existing neighborhoods. That doesn't mean putting up big apartment buildings or complexes in the middle of single family neighborhoods. But it means things like duplexes or some townhomes. It means more condos. And it means things that help preserve the character of neighborhoods while also bringing down the cost of housing and making it affordable to live here. City Council has a role in that with updating zoning rules with updating building codes. The state also has a role in that with things like construction defect laws that let us do more of that building. And so I think that our city council should act on what we can and should advocate loudly and we should advocate loudly for those changes that need to happen on the state level to make sure we're fighting for our residents. Thank you. Candidate Wassink. I agree that a blanket change to our zoning across the city doesn't make sense. And I also want to clarify the difference between up zoning, allowing for higher density on a unit versus mixed use. Mixed use would allow for a lot of other types of structures to be built. And those types of things really need to go in front of City Council and ensure that we're thinking through the impacts of that on the neighborhood, on the community and on our infrastructure. Thank you. Candidate Christ. A better sense of community is a good place to start. And I think this should be on a case-by-case basis. Two of the methods that we have for creating affordable housing are inclusive housing measures and ADUs. Now in Ward 1, we have a lot of ADU opportunity in that many single family homes were actually zoned for duplexes. And so many people do rent out part of their home. And more of that would be helpful. Thank you. Our next question will be answered by candidate Wassink first. And it is, describe how you see the role of municipal government, paying particular attention to whether protecting individual rights versus ensuring that vulnerable populations are not left behind is more important. I see the role of government as multifaceted. There's the basic service provision, our basic infrastructure access to sewer water. There's the quality of life measures, access to our parks and open space. And then there's the really critical work to ensure that the most vulnerable amongst us aren't thrust deeper into tragedy. That can look like our building codes, ensuring that people are able to live in safe, stable environments. It's the incentive programs that we provide to ensure that we're getting additional housing. And it's also looking at things like minimum wages and ensuring that we're able to create a an environment where people can not just live but thrive. The really important role of our city government is to ensure that all of that is done with an equitable lens, that we are really thinking about the the impacts across racial lines, gender, sexual orientation to again ensure that oppressed peoples aren't further hurt by our regulations. Thank you. Candidate Christ, could you repeat the question? Yes. Describe how you see the role of municipal government paying particular attention to whether protecting individual rights versus ensuring that vulnerable populations are not left behind is more important. Thank you. As I mentioned, I believe City Council is really an administrator for taxpayers for their intent and also for their dollars. Something I've observed in Longmont before is the better that all of Longmont does, the better the vulnerable population does. And I think that's the way forward. The more we focus on our positives, on our success, on building business, the better everyone in town will do and the more other people's other people have to contribute to functions that help others. Thank you. Candidate Earl. I think it's important to remember that government at all levels is of the people for the people and by the people. We work for we if we were elected City Council work for you the residents and it's important that we stand up for individual rights but it's equally important we protect those whose rights are being violated. It's been explained to me in constitutional law classes and I'm not a lawyer so excuse the poor description. The right to swing your fist stops when it gets close to someone else's face and I think that's really important in the way we think about protecting people. Yes we all have our own individual rights we can't use that to hurt anybody in the process. Thank you. Our next question will be answered first by candidate Christ and it is council members receive many complaints about noise and danger caused by street racing during the summer months. Is this just a part of life in Longmont? What policy changes would you support to reduce this problem? Well that's an interesting question. I did mention I'm the vice chair of the transportation board. I think that's a need for more community. I think one of the things our young people in town are missing is a place to hang out. We used to have a mall and we don't have that anymore. I should say we don't have an indoor mall where you can hang out and just hang out with your friends. But having a community commercial center someplace where you can take your kids take them to the recreation center while you know as the mom maybe goes and gets groceries or you know goes to the salon and then you can pick them up later but it gives them that private time with their friends where they're actually in a community center there they have other people around is fairly safe it's an epicenter that the police can can easily drive by and keep a keep an eye on what's going on. I think that's what's missing right now in the fabric and structure of our neighborhoods and I think that would help everybody find an outlet for for the engagement that they're looking for by racing in the street. Thank you. Candidate Earl. The question is if street racing is that inevitable just a part of life in Longmont? No it really shouldn't be. I don't disagree with Diane. I do think there's some community involved there but I also think there there is need for more enforcement. There is things like the police's radar cameras or sorry not radar cameras but the devices that show you their speed that are connected in so they see in real-time what's happening across the city and can respond to it and it is things like decibel meters that actually allow them to enforce the codes that are already existing. I think that's an important part of it and I think it's something that we need to be prioritizing a little bit more. Thank you. Candidate Laws Inc. I think as we continue on our path towards vision zero, monitoring our streets and streets being utilized in unsafe ways is an inevitable part of that. To that same end though I'm hearing from community members that they are opting to not go on our streets during certain times of the day because of the fear of street racing. So while we work on enforcement we also need to ensure that we're providing transportation options that meet their needs. Our new microtransit grant is actually a really fantastic step towards that and will also help with their transportation needs more holistically. Thank you. That concludes our question and answer portion. The first part and now we're going to move on. We're going to move on to the lightning round. A little pallet cleanser. We'll start with candidate, candidate Laws Inc. first and then candidate Earl. Have you ever ridden a city bus? Yes. Yes. And then candidate Chris. Absolutely. And now starting with candidate Chris. Sands or Costco. Oh, both. Costco. Costco. Candidate Laws Inc. Would you ban plastic straws if you could? No. Yes. No. Okay. Candidate Chris. Should Longmont freeze annexations of land? Yes. No. No. Okay. Last question candidate Laws Inc. What would be your vehicle of choice of money if we're no object? Dog sled. I drill a little of an Audi EV. Hyperloop. Wonderful. Thank you. So now we are about to enter in our second half of question answer. We're going to begin with candidate Laws Inc. And then candidate Earl. Should Longmont change its electric rate structure to encourage more people to install solar panels on their homes or commercial buildings? Why or why not? That's an interesting concept. I certainly am all for whatever we can do in terms of incentive structures to get more individuals using renewable energies. Obviously, we have this investment as a city through PRPA, but we have individual opportunities as well. So it's definitely something I look into and consider. I think we also just need to ensure, though, again, that we're thinking about some of the most vulnerable folks in our community. So if we're changing rate structures, how can we ensure that low income families aren't negatively impacted at that same time? Thank you. Candidate Earl. So when you talk to the folks at LPC, they think that the current rate structure of the net metering is actually incredibly valuable for solar and that any revisions they bring are likely to make it less beneficial because it's almost too generous right now. I think it's really important, as Nia mentioned, to think about equity and the rate structure right now is not super equitable to everybody. And so I'd like to see us move more towards incentives and rebates through efficiency works or other avenues as a way to encourage solar rather than looking strictly at a rate structure. Thank you. Candidate Christ. That's a great answer, Harrison. Thanks. I think solar is a great tool, but I think it should be a private decision whether you use solar. And I think real environmental gains will be achieved from technology changes in transportation. We're talking about the Hyperloop, because we just mentioned it, but moving cargo through the Hyperloop, the emissions savings are going to be massive. And Virgin Hyperloop in California is working on that right now. Thank you. Next question will be answered first by Candidate Earl. And it is, should Longmont build a shelter for homeless people who live on the streets? Do you think that this could eliminate or dramatically reduce homelessness in Longmont? Yes. Longmont should invest in a shelter for homeless people in Longmont. I think it's really important that when we think about those experiencing homeless list, we start with the fact that they're human beings and need to be treated with decency and respect. And we provide them services so that they can get through a rough patch in their life and move into more permanent housing. Now, I would rather see Longmont partner with our other communities in Boulder County to do something on a county-wide basis that works to help people rather than Longmont pursue its own goal, Boulder pursue its own goal, and that we're able to therefore have more resources available to people, be able to have mental health addiction services, financial counseling, help with down payments, rent assistance, kind of all in one roof that serves the entire county. I'd rather see that approach, but I think Longmont absolutely should put our resources and our funding into a shelter and into helping those experiencing homelessness and help them move into permanent housing. Thank you. Canada first. I liked your answer, Harrison. Longmont does need a place for homeless to sleep. Loveland has had success with churches and they've been taking turns providing supervised sleeping areas for local homeless and donations then fund or directly to participate either in a fund or directly to participating churches would help develop this program in Longmont. Thank you. Candidate Wassink. Having just come from Hope's fundraiser, our primary homeless services organization here in Longmont, it's very clear that a permanent shelter location is absolutely needed. Right now we are relying on the generosity of churches to provide those services. I want to be really clear though that providing emergency shelter in and of itself is not going to actually address homelessness. We need the full spectrum of support, like substance use treatment, behavioral health, support with stability. We also need the transitional housing and permanent supportive housing like the in between can provide. Thank you. Our next question will be answered first by candidate Christ followed by candidate Wassink. The state of Colorado pays for 10 hours of early childhood education for 440s. How do we help parents with the rest? You know I was just speaking with the the members of the R Center and they were talking about their provided daycare and what they were concerned about is that they have a hard time finding teachers. So I think you know we tend to look at these problems and think of micro solutions but I think the solutions actually need to come from a macro lens. I don't think it's just enough to provide more money or provide more incentives to families. I think we have to look at systematically why do we not have adequate childcare in our town and what actually would work for families. Now I raised four children and I know how hard it is to find good daycare but I did have success finding it in my neighborhood and that worked that really worked the best. It was private providers and it was interesting because we could work out deals you know maybe she needed my services and I would help her with with her accounting sometimes. Thank you. Candidate Wassink. I'm very honored to be a part of the Early Childhood Alliance that was looking towards larger solutions. We proposed a special district that would have infused tens of thousands of dollars sorry tens of millions of dollars into our Early Childhood Environment here in Boulder County. Unfortunately that measure has not moved forward. We will continue to fight for that. At the same time the city has opportunities. They're currently partnering with TLC Learning Center to create a hub and we have many other providers that need additional support in their direct provision of early child care. Thank you. Candidate Earl. Yeah I'm glad you brought up the Early Childhood Alliance I think that's a phenomenal place to start with but I also think this question started with the state of Colorado and the state of Colorado only providing 10 hours and so I want to kick it back to our legislators in Denver. This is a statewide problem this is not unique to Longmont and so you know Diane if we're talking macro solutions which I love let's focus on the statewide level let's do more to get people into the pipeline of teachers let's fund it more and let's do things to help families all over the state including those here in Longmont. Thank you. This next question will first be answered by candidate Wasink and then candidate Christ. The question is council members are often asked by residents why why weren't we allowed to vote on this or that issue. In your opinion is the policy balance between what is put to popular vote and what is decided by elected representatives about right or do we have too many votes or is council too powerful. The question. That's a big one yeah but I'll take it. You know I think first off I want to make sure that's really clear that many of the measures that are on our ballot is actually because of Tabor. We have to send to the voters tax measures that has to be voted on directly so many of the other items that are referred. Actually on this year's ballot you really won't see any. I think what's more important though is really the community engagement. As council members I think it's incumbent upon us to do direct community engagement and not just engage with those who show up for public comment because to show up to public comment as city council meeting requires a certain level of privilege. We need to be out in the community as council members hearing directly from the individuals and the organizations doing the work and then we can also ensure that we have sufficient time to bring those voices into the council chambers and have really well informed decisions. Thank you candidate Christ. Could you ask that question again. Yes council members are often asked by residents why weren't we allowed to vote on this or that issue. In your opinion is the policy balance between what is put to popular vote and what is decided by elected representatives about right or do we have too many votes or is council too powerful. I think when we're talking about why didn't we get a chance to vote on that they're talking about policy changes that happened in during council meetings and I would say that often the council meetings go long and it is tough for people to meet all the public invited to be heard. I would also say that often the packet information you know just comes out like this morning for Tuesday's meeting and people don't have an adequate time to fully review the information sometimes those packets are 700 pages long. Thank you candidate Earl. I think we're all kind of saying the same thing here that we do think that the balance of power is more or less correct. I think one thing that would be really important as both me and Diana alluded to is things like changing meeting times and varying them so that people have the ability to come provide input. It is things like making sure that council members have open office hours and are accessible to members of the community and be able to hear that feedback and recognize that if there is something very controversial that we need to have extra outreach and be able to hear feedback in advance of any vote. Thank you. Our next question will be first answered by candidate Chris followed by candidate Osink and the question is should Longmont install public or should Longmont install parking meters to reduce traffic congestion downtown? Well that's a great question. I'll tell you that businesses do not like parking meters and the reason why businesses don't like parking meters is they think it's going to keep people from participating or in their functions or shopping at their stores. The truth is that parking meters actually encourage customers to get in get what they need done and leave so that they beat the meter so there's actually more turnover of customers when parking meters are installed. It actually turns out that businesses can do better with parking meters. It is parking is a really big expense for the city and so it is one measure that the city can use it's a more of a use tax in other words you don't pay for it unless you use it so it is one effective way to manage those costs for the transportation department. Thank you candidate Osink. Yeah I think we've got a few different things happening here. As candidate Chris alluded to there are definitely concerns that I'm hearing from businesses. If we move to parking meters people will spend less time downtown. So I think it's also about a behavioral shift. We have a parking garage on Collier that folks can use to spend significantly more time in their downtown area. I was there last night for Unity in the community and people are fighting for parking and I drove up to the second floor of that parking garage and parked straight away so we need to continue to ensure that folks are thinking about parking downtown differently. Thank you candidate Earl. So I'd like to expand this beyond parking. I don't necessarily think parking meters are the answer downtown but clearly there also is a lack of parking and I'd like to address that through other transportation methods. Make it safer to bike downtown to walk downtown. Systems like a bike share in Longmont that we haven't had for years and really didn't reach the corners of the city when it did. And it is about expanding our bus network. You can't take a bus downtown even if you happen to live on one of the lines for the evening. The buses stop running at five and six p.m. That stuff needs to be changed and I really think our microtransit is one way to do that. Thank you. Our next question will first be answered by candidate Earl then candidate Chris. And that question is we are in an ozone non-compliance area. Can you explain what that means and how should Longmont do its part to reduce ozone levels locally? I'm going to do my best to explain what that means. That is not my area of expertise but my understanding from what I've read is it means we're out of compliance with the federal guidelines around ozone and around pollutants in the air. And so I think what's, you know, where we start with that as Longmont is making sure that we're providing tools and incentives for our residents, our businesses, to reduce our emissions. That goes with our 2030 goal to get out of carbon power, to get out of the coal generation business. It does include increased solar. It includes electrifying homes to get out of natural gas. And all of that needs some incentives and needs to be able to be done equitably. Often what comes up is actions like getting gas cars off the road or moving away from gas lawn and yard equipment. And I think we do need to be moving towards an electric future. I support that but I really don't think this is, you know, talking about a blanket ban on that but it is about a transition and working over time to make sure that we're reducing our emissions. Thank you. Candidate Christ. I need you to read that question again. Yes. We are in an ozone non-compliance area. Can you explain what that means and how should Longmont do its part to reduce ozone levels locally? Okay. I think Harrison described the ozone complex problem the best. So I'm going to skip over that and say that one of the things that's affecting us is, one, our altitude and two, our weather in terms of we have inversions in the winter. Something we can do to fix that is we can create the community commercial centers I'm talking about because the idea is that you have short trips within your neighborhood and you're able to do five things while you're there, condensing five trips into one, which would help our emissions and our ozone. Thank you. Candidate Wassink. I'm going to thank Harrison for taking one for the team. Yes. And say I actually very much agree with much of what he said and instead talk about what happens when we don't know the answers. As a city council person there will absolutely be topics that we are not as well versed in. For me it's about reaching out to community organizations. I would immediately call my friends at Sustainable Resilient Longmont and get their perspectives on what we should be doing, getting policy recommendations, and then going out to the community to hear directly from our residents about what's needed in Longmont. Thank you. Our next question will be answered first by Candidate Wassink and then Candidate Earl and the question is do you support a camping ban within the city of Longmont? Absolutely not. And now I'll explain. Camping bans divert resources from actual solutions and we've seen this in surrounding towns when they they put money into public safety to move people from spaces, from theoretically public spaces. What we're saying with the camping ban is those are public spaces for certain people. What we need to be doing again is investing in resources, investing in places where people can go to get the support they need. We have amazing community organizations. The hour center ensures that folks have stability so hopefully they don't enter into homelessness. We have hope that helps people get out of homelessness and ensure that those times spent are short and infrequent. Those are the programs that we need to be investing in. If we're having issues in our parks we can work with public safety to find alternative solutions. Again I'm going to bring up Lanyon Park where they installed lights which allowed the neighborhood to feel much more safe in those spaces. Camping bans do not solve the problem and we need to invest in solutions that do. Thank you Candidate Earl. Yeah I appreciate the kind words that's the last one so I'll return the favor here. I think you're absolutely right. I don't think we need camping bans in Longmont and I really think it goes back to those extra resources and as I talked about earlier on a shelter I think it's something we need to look at regionally. I think a camping ban encourages say moving a problem, moving people, human beings from Longmont to Boulder for example or other communities and that's really not the right way to help people and get them on the path towards permanent housing and out of a very rough time in their life. So no I don't think a camping ban is the right way to approach this. I don't think it's worth criminalizing those experiencing homelessness. Thank you. Candidate Christ. Well I'm going to say to Nia I agree with you that anything with a homeless is a temporary solution until they're housed. One of the things about camping is it is a temporary solution and I don't see a problem with utilizing it. They're building an RV park in Meade and there could be coupons what have you to go and and stay camp there but also we have some really beautiful spots all along our Weld County Road where we could marry that idea with parking meters and have some very affordable parking for camping bands. Thank you. Our next question will first be answered by candidate Earl then candidate Christ and the question is what would you do to ensure that Longmont's highly marginalized trans community feels safe in their hometown? It's a good question. I'm probably not going to have a firm answer here but I'll tell you a little story. When I was in college one of the friends I met on my freshman floor came out to me within the first couple weeks as trans and this was the first trans person I had ever met in my life. He did not have a community at the college did I think felt a little uncertain and one of the things that I did along with another friend is we went to the residential life group and actually got the three of us to live together in a suite that is you know technically mixed sex but did not feel like that to us it was just friends living together and supporting him in a way that really worked for him. Now I don't know what those things are that the trans community in Longmont would want to see specifically but I'm an ally and I would like to use that exact same approach that I did with my friend to all of my friends in the trans community and more broadly in any community in Longmont who feels marginalized to make sure they feel like they're at home here in Longmont and that they're supported, loved, and that they belong. Thank you. Candidate Christ. That was a very sensitive answer. I don't know if people are aware but we've been doing trans surgeries for many years primarily started down in Trinidad, Colorado so we've had trans individuals in our community for a long time. I think it's about diversity it can be complicated when people are different than you so I think that's really a diversity question and nicely in Ward 1 which we're all candidates for Ward 1 we have a multicultural neighborhood in most of Ward 1 so I think this is something that we would more easily embrace. Thank you. Candidate Wasink. So first and foremost to any trans individuals watching or friends of trans individuals please know that I'm here to support you and ensure your safety. We know Boulder County is not immune to the anti-trans hate that we've seen across the country and especially trans women of color are the most likely to be harmed. We have advocates in the trans community who are currently pushing for a human rights committee just to ensure we have a place to deal with this at the city. What our trans community needs I am there for and will wholeheartedly support. Thank you. Our next question will be answered by candidate Christ and then followed by candidate Wasink and the question is should the city subsidize training for in-home child care providers? Also another good question. I'm not a big fan of subsidies however if you have a plan and you have a timeline for how long that's going to be and you have goals in mind oftentimes those programs can work very effectively. I think what it becomes difficult is when you have a training program and you don't you know just kind of wishy-washy about it you don't know how many people you're trying to to put out there to take care of children and you don't know what the goals should be and you don't know how long that should go on and who should be doing the training. So I'm saying all those are typical things that we should think about before we consider subsidizing. That being said it's important that child care is safe and affordable and also that there's some consistency in the way child care occurs. Thank you candidate Wasink. So I just want to follow that up to say that there are training curriculum that have been developed that have been verified and evaluated. Two of our statewide providers of those programs are actually clients of mine and so I know that they work. Providing that kind of training to what we call FFN family friend neighbor care is really important not just in terms of ensuring we have the full bevy of early childhood but ensuring we're doing it in culturally responsive ways. Certain communities prefer to educate their young kids at home and we should be there to support that. Thank you candidate Earl. This is a topic I don't know as much about as as Nea clearly does. I applaud that answer but I would say look as we talk about child care and we've talked about this earlier I think it's really important that we do provide support we do supply training and that we help bring more providers into the child care system because that is a considerable hurdle in getting care not just the cost which we've talked about not just the availability of facilities but also having the appropriate staff that is well trained has the right resources and can help really help go through early childhood education correctly. Thank you. The next question is the covenants of homeowners associations or HOAs can offer often overrule city code. Do you concur with this practice? How would you work to change it or why do you think it's appropriate the way it is? Let's start with you candidate Chris. Okay. This is a tough one for me. I've heard both pros and cons about HOAs and I've had some experience with them and I am conflicted about it. I think HOAs are good in terms of organizing neighborhood watches and bringing a community together. I think it becomes a little bit of a policing society sometimes and also we've had some difficulty with the HOAs just budging on installing solar, budging on zero escaping the yards. You know they have these covenants and sometimes they get out of out of time with what's going on and they're hard to change once that happens. So gosh I could go either way on this and I I guess I would like to hear more from communities that have them. My neighborhood does not have an HOA so we don't have that particular problem in my neighborhood but I know others that that do. So I would like to hear their the constituents response to how they feel about their HOA. Thank you. Candidate Wasink. I think my red flag antenna always always goes up when I hear that we've got groups that are trying to overrule our our city's ordinances. I would definitely want to know more about any specific examples of that before making a definitive answer. I did hear recently from a supporter that their HOA was barring them from utilizing yard signs and we've seen actually Supreme Court cases about First Amendment that allows for that. So those kind of constitutional rights being infringed upon by HOAs is also a concern and something that I think we should be discussing at City Council. Thank you. Candidate Earl. I live at HOA so I have experience dealing with our HOA board. Luckily it's run by wonderful neighbors and they do a great job. But I do think it's really a problem if they are allowed to be in conflict with our city code, city building laws and ordinances and that's something we should address. I'd say more broadly something that's concerned to me that came up at a Tuesday City Council meeting is the comment that given the city's lack of investment in new development that any new development is likely to be in HOA and I think it's something we need to go back to the drawing board so that we're not forcing that model on any new developments. Thank you. That concludes our second and final question and answer portion of today's debate and now is an opportunity for each of the candidates to give a one-minute closing statement and we'll begin with candidate Wassink. Wonderful. Well if you're still watching I appreciate that. I'm exhausted and I'm sure you might be as well but I really appreciate the time the civic engagement of our voters is so critical for the future success of our community. I do have some pretty amazing colleagues up here with some very specific expertise. I think the difference you're going to get if you vote for me is my entire career being spent in community service. I know about the community organizations doing the work because I'm working alongside them. I've been on boards where I've directly addressed homelessness. I'm a governance trainer so I can help ensure that our city council is working effectively and efficiently. Those are the skills that I look forward to bringing forth to council while also utilizing the community engagement that I do every day in my day job. That's the kind of work that ensures that your voice is heard. I haven't been able to talk about accessibility of city government in tonight's debate and that's a really critically important thing. I really encourage you to go to my website find me on social media Nia Furlanma where you can learn more about how our city government works. Thank you. Candidate Earl. Thank you all for watching. Thank you to Longmont Public Media and the League of Women Voters for putting on tonight's debate and thank you Faith for moderating and keeping us all on topic. Thank you Nia, Diane. I really appreciate the discussion tonight and all the candidates and all the debates today. I think we're all grateful that Longmont has so many amazing candidates willing to stand up and look for the chance to represent our city and everyone watching thank you for your engagement and trying to be active and informed voters. As I really hope you've seen from my answers tonight, I'm focused on a common sense approach not on sound bites or talking points. I'm pushing for real relevant and attainable policies that our city council can adopt to make Longmont even better. There's a whole lot we didn't talk about tonight. There's obviously a lot more nuance in this so I invite you to visit my website HarrisonforLongmont.com, learn a little bit more about me, reach out to me. I'm happy to talk to you individually or to any groups in organizations in the city. Please join me in fighting for an affordable, livable and sustainable Longmont and remember to return your ballot by November 7th. Thank you so much. Thank you. Candidate Christ. This is a new generation Longmont. Let's be bold. Let's be bold not with our pocketbooks but with our imagination, with our ingenuity and with our love for each other. Let's find our circles and draw them closer. Community commercial centers will restore the fabric and structure of our neighborhoods. Policing will be easier, recreation and library, grocery and personal care will be readily available. RV Tourism will bolster the North Longmont Business Corridor and we will finally recover from the pandemic. As a business owner and a business consultant, I have the skills to facilitate this growth. Find more information about my policies at ChristopherLongmontCouncil.com We can rebuild the Longmont we love and our children will return and prosper as we did. I thank Nia and Harrison for joining me tonight and for sharing your ideas and your time with me. Thank you LPM. Thank you League of Women Voters and thank you Faith. And this concludes our debate. The next and final debate of the day will begin in one hour. So for those of you in the audience you may stay in your seat, leave the building or spend time in the lobby speaking to candidates and gathering candidate literature. If you decide to stay please return to the studio no later than 15 minutes before the next debate. The lights will flash and there will be an announcement. And we'd like to thank our friends at the League of Women Voters of Boulder County and sustainable resilient Longmont for their help and support.