 I'd now like to call the November 17th, 2020, Longmont City Council regular session to order. We already approved the minutes for October 27th. There's no minutes ready for this agenda, Mayor. Right, that's what I thought. Okay, cool. So do we have any agenda revision submission of documents or motions to direct the city manager? Mayor, there was one document revision, not an agenda revision noted in the substitute ordinance for ordinance 2020-62 for item 12A1. Let's go ahead and, Harold, it's been a big day with COVID-19 and the governor, and it's been a rough week. So do you want to go ahead and report to us? So I'm going to start with the final revised metrics. The old level read became level read, severe risk, long-term sustained metrics or multiple metrics met. And specifically what they're looking at is greater than 350 in 100,000 cases in a two-week incidents. It was just reported that the state CDPHE did move us to level read. Their county, they moved 14 counties. They indicated that they were going to move some other counties to orange. But the big change in level read when you look at high-risk populations is where we were in level orange, it was strongly advised to stay at home. Level read actually puts the high-risk populations in the stay-at-home category. So if you were in the orange level, it was up to 10 from no more than two households. So now they're saying no personal gatherings. In terms of schools, schools is a little bit interesting. So K through five in-person is suggested. Middle school, in-person, hybrid or remote suggested. And then high school, they're suggesting a hybrid or remote. Another significant change is really to the restaurants. And so now they're saying take out curbside delivery or to go orders or open-air dining in terms of offices. In the orange level, we were at 25% remote work where it was strongly encouraged. They're now 10% remote work is strongly encouraged. Gems and fitness centers are at 10%, 10 indoors per room or outdoors in groups of less than 10. And then critical and non-critical retail is essentially staying the same as it was in level orange, 50%. With events, any indoor events are now closed. Outdoor events have been reduced to 25% or 75 people based on the size. This is really what we're seeing in terms of what the governor's reacting to. So we're definitely seeing in Boulder County the growth, but we're seeing that really throughout the entire state. When you then look at the positive, the two-week testing positivity rate we're currently at 8.3%. But when you look at the positivity rate, we're actually at a lower level than Weld and Larimer. We've obviously been watching the young adult gathering public health order metrics. So what we can tell you on this is we're in the same spot that we were before. New cases and positivity worsened over the last week. And so we're just continuing to move in that area. So this graph really says it all. You can see that we hit a high of 326. We hope that the trend that we've seen recently continues in terms of where we're moving because that will make a difference in terms of the level red piece. And something that's important in this is, for a while we really started seeing fewer cases associated with college students. But now about 12% of the cases in the past week have been among CU affiliated Boulder County residents. When we look at this, the other change, and we hadn't seen this for a while, but we're starting to see it again, is actually the number of cases that are associated with long-term care facilities. And there are currently nine confirmed active outbreaks in the Boulder County long-term care facilities. Our five-day rolling average in daily case count is at about 220.6 cases per day. Obviously, if we continue on the trend that you saw on a previous slide, that number will continue to go down. And that's gonna be really important in terms of how we look at a potential move from red to orange in the future. So what I wanna point out here is the red line is actually Boulder. And you can see the spike when we had it with the university. And then, so we're right about there. Now we're gonna look at it in terms of municipality. So you can see in terms of what we've seen since the 1st of October and the cases per 100,000. We're now the highest. Again, this graph is just a different depiction and it gives you the same look at the data per communities. Dark blue Boulder, light blue Longmont, Louisville Lafayette Superior, and then all the other municipalities in this. And so Boulder, for last week had about 656 cases, Longmont, 598, Louisville Lafayette Superior, 230 cases, and then 183 in the rest of the county. Price cumulative rates per 100,000, they were in the 18 to 22, 23 to 24, 24 to 34 and 35 to 44. So basically that 18 to 44 range has really had the highest case counts recently. And I know this slide prompted a lot of conversation last week, but we are continuing to see increases in the number of cases of all school age groups when we compare it to the most recent two weeks. Now this is an important slide, 78.2% of the cases in Boulder County have a known race ethnicity. Again, seeing persistent large disparities among the Hispanic Latinx population. In the past seven days, 47.6 of our cases or 506 have been among the Hispanic Latinx and 49.3 or 524 cases have been among white non-Hispanic categories. When we look in the testing, again reminds you, 10-1, we're at 4.7, today we're at 8.5 or as of 10, 11, 16, 9 a.m. You can see how many tests we've been performing in Boulder County. This is just a different way to look at where we've been moving in terms of the positivity. This is actually a good sign. You know, and who would have thought when we were actually just before here and we were below 2% that we would be seeing this move to 8.5% is a good sign. All of that's gonna come into play when we look at the way they've constructed the new dial. Another example of what the different age groups have been doing over time. Seven day rolling average of PCR tests with positive results. We've had a lot of questions about hospitalizations. This is cumulative over time in terms of what we've seen. So this really talks about our hospital resources. We have 108 ICU beds available in Boulder County. Total 108 ICU beds, we have 19 available as of today. So we have 145 available med search beds, adult critical vents, 50 total, 28 available. Non-critical vents, you can still see that all of those are available. This is the statewide hospitalization piece. And so the blue is confirmed COVID-19. The brown is under investigation or the light tan under investigation for COVID-19 in terms of deaths among Boulder County residents who've tested positive. And you can see how from about June 6th to the end of September, anytime you lose a life, it's tragic for a community and a county, but it looked much different. We are starting to look similar to where we were in April. And I think that's part of what they're also looking at. About 71% of the deaths to date have been among the long-term care facility residents. And this is the key COVID data resources. I will also have the full side deck that I'll get to Don. Good evening, everybody. I'm gonna add three things here. I'm gonna talk about testing hospitals and then vaccinations really fast. We'll talk a little bit about the disproportionate amount of cases in the Latinx community. So Carmen, as Carmen always does, partnered with Public Health to develop some kind of targeted testing sites that we've done two of so far. We have bilingual staff down there, kind of resource kits available for everybody coming through. And both times we've done about 120 tests or so. The larger sites are ripping every day 100,000 or 1,000 a day. So I think the testing available in the community is good. We are hospitals. So today, unfortunately, we did break our previous record. We had 91 in the hospital today. In Longmont, we had 29, which is a significant number for Longmont beds. And I can give you those up-to-date numbers for today. They're a little bit misleading, no, because we don't break out COVID ICU beds versus regular hospital ICU beds. So those could be filled up with, you know, strokes, heart attacks, whatever. But as of this morning, countywide, we have 108 total, 72 of them, excuse me, 15 of them are still available. The med-surg availability right now is 112 in the county and 14 in the city. But I think the big message that Harold was giving really does hold true is they are full. The hospitals are very concerned about staffing. It's not only just fatigue, they've been doing it a long time, but their staff is also affected by quarantine sickness. But an important point is they are not seeing any, if any, spread inside the hospital. From July to September, there were nine deaths in the county. We had nine last week. So there's some trends that we would certainly like to get ahead of here. Quickly on to vaccinations. This is something we get asked a lot. And there isn't a tremendous amount of information on these yet. And there are significant logistical issues involved with vaccinating a entire world. So I wouldn't think about anything that's gonna be community available before March, April-ish. So we're not planning for any widespread distribution before then. There's, I have heard from the county is the contact tracing that they aren't trying to do, that the virus is so far ahead of it that they're really not trying all that much and they don't have the staff to catch up either. All right, that concludes our COVID-19 update. Thank you guys. Let's move on to special reports and presentations for the 2020 Colorado APWA Parks and Trails Award for the Dickens Farm Nature Area. Steve Randsweiler, Senior Project Manager for Public Works and Natural Resources. Parks and Trails Project within a large community and for Dickens Farm Nature Area. And we're very proud of this award. And I'm gonna turn this over to Pete Adler to present this award to the city council. Thanks, Steve. As was mentioned, my name is Pete Adler and I'm the Colorado Chapter Delegate to the American Public Works Association. On behalf of the Board of Directors of the Colorado Chapter of APWA, I'm here tonight to recognize the city of Longmont for the Dickens Farm Nature Area. All right, you wanna go ahead and read the consent agenda for us? You bet, mayor. Item 9A1 is Resolution 2020-122, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving a cooperative agreement between the city and the Longmont Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 6. For January 1st, 2021 through December 31st, 2021. 9A2 is Resolution 2020-123, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving a cooperative agreement between the city and the Longmont Professional Firefighters Association, International Association of Firefighters Local 1806 for January 1st, 2021 through December 31st, 2021. Sorry, 9B is Resolution 2020-124, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the Intergovernmental Agreement between the city and Adam State University for a Memorandum of Affiliation permitting educational experiences and counseling. 9C is Resolution 2020-125, a resolution of the Longmont City Council approving the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Longmont and the County of Boulder for the acquisition and management of the McLaughlin property. 9D is Resolution 2020-126, a resolution of the Council of the City of Longmont, Colorado, finding that the petition for annexation of a parcel of land located in Boulder County, State of Colorado, known as the River Anxation, generally located north of Boston Avenue and east of Sunset Street, substantially complies with the Colorado Revised Statutes, Section 312-1071. And 9E is Resolution 2020-127, a resolution of the Longmont City Council supporting public health agencies in slowing the spread of COVID-19. I would like to pull item B and E. Council Member Waters? I'd like to pull item A. I'm gonna move Consent Agenda, Less A, B and E. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Aye. All right, the motion carries unanimously. Okay, I move Resolution 2020-124. I'll second it. All right, all in favor of Resolution 2020-124, so you know for the debate, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. All right, Resolution 2020-124 passes unanimously. All right, let's move on to Resolution 2020-127. I was gonna pull that as well. Take a vote. All in favor of Resolution 2020-127, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. All right, Resolution 2020-127 passes unanimously. Go ahead and move Amendment 2020-02 to the 2020 CDBG Action Plan and close the public hearing. Second. All right, it's been moved and seconded. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. All right, great. Let's move on to item 12. Tonight, we have several folks joining us. I can't, I have representatives from Costco. Jennifer Murillo will be presenting on their behalf. Representatives from the Golden Family. And the development team that's been working on this. We were approached by a developer with the potential of locating Costco in Longmont. We realized we needed a new location based on the infrastructure and economics there. We didn't pick a particular location. We set a bunch of options based on what we knew the space requirements would be. What are the benefits of locating Costco in Longmont? And so now I will actually turn it over to Jessica to talk about the Costco economic impact from her perspective. Thank you, Harold. So I'll just real quickly talk about from an economic development perspective, we typically look at retail and primary industry projects very differently. Retail projects we're typically looking at significant fiscal benefits, which you'll hear about the significant fiscal benefits, which are the direct dollars into city coffers that Costco location brings to the community. Mayor Ugly and members of council, Dale Rademacher, take a few minutes here and just step through some of the highlights and key elements of the particular agreement that's in front of you. Public-private partnership agreement or the P3 agreement, there's several key elements. As I mentioned, this is a 48 acre site. It's immediately south of Kenpratt Boulevard and immediately east of the harvest junction commercial and residential areas. This is a site plan that gives a little more detail for the proposed layout of the Costco facilities. I mentioned earlier, council, that there are several clawback provisions in the main contract to protect the city's investment. And with that, I'll turn it over to Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Jim Golden. Glad to pick it up from here. I'm gonna get into the financing and the project costs first. The total cost for the projects, and that's the Costco and the affordable housing project are $23.6 million. The city share of those costs are just below $13 million. The developer costs are $3.6 million and the Costco costs are $6.9 million. So this here are the city's project costs. Costco project is $9.9 million and the affordable housing is a little over $3 million. So now looking at that from a net basis after deducting the amount of estimated cannibalized taxes that would be drawing from other retailers, it would be just over $3 million of net new sales taxes in the first year. So in December 20, we'll be looking at the execution of the P3 agreements and the related agreements that we discussed. The agreement calls for sometime prior to July of 24 that Costco would move to open the warehouse. A quick note, I'd be remiss if I didn't thank Jennifer and Reggie Golden, two people that I really appreciated working through the details on this particular project. Dr. Waters. I move ordinance 2020-62. Second. All right, it's been moved and seconded. There's no further discussion or debate. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, ordinance 2020-62, the substituted version passes unanimously. I'll move ordinance 2020-63. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor of ordinance 2020-63 say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, ordinance 2020-63 passes unanimously. Dr. Waters. I'll move ordinance 2020-64. I'll second that one. All right, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, ordinance 2020-64 passes unanimously. Let's move on to short term rentals. Mayor Bagley, members of council, Johnny Marsh, assistant city manager. This is a little bit of a continuation from our July 14th council meeting. So just to a reminder of the current definitions in the code, both for council, but also for the public who may be watching this evening. So again, here are some of the additional rental requirements that are currently at play. So some of the other items that we took notes on and I went back and watched the last meeting a couple of times to try to make sure that we got a general feel for some of the questions council had, but also some of the common themes. And I think really some of those themes were frankly around compliance and asking applicants really to be accountable for submitting documentation to us. So let's go ahead and vote. And the issue is the motion on the table is to direct staff to bring back in the ordinance, making it permissible for Longmont residents who have a second home in Longmont to use such home as a short term rental. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Nay. So the motion carries five to two with council members Christensen and council member Peck opposed. Before we started tonight, Harold told me that we could take 12C and 12D and put it on a future agenda. Aye. Opposed postpone C and D to a future meeting. Second. Okay. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right. So the ayes have it unanimously. Let's go to mayor and council comments. Council member Peck. Thank you mayor Bagley. I'm gonna give a really fast update on some of the things that are happening on RTD if you don't mind. First of all, I wanna thank everybody who called in or emailed especially mayors and commissioners coalition and the Metro mayors on retaining that FISA account, the fast tracks internal savings account because not only did the board vote to retain it for two years, they put $17 million more into that fund bringing it from 120 million to 137.3 million. So that tells me if they can do that, perhaps maybe their financial picture isn't as dire as they would like it to be. Our new director who's gonna replace Judy Lubau is Eric Davidson. We are according to Phil Greenwald going to have the front range rail coalition come to our December meeting. We can use this $137.3 million to build platforms to pay for the engineering study to make it a shovel ready project to get funding from Dr. Kog and the federal government. Councilor Warren. Thank you, Mayor Bagley. I guess you can say anything you want to in public invited to be heard. I'd like to talk about free speech because when I write things in the newspaper I am representing myself. It says that in italics, right under my columns that my opinions are my own and don't necessarily represent the opinions of the city council or the city of Longmont. So I think it's a little bit disingenuous for people to call up and essentially initiate a debate about the personal statements of a member of the council at the city council. It would be slander if you could slander an elected official to say that I am against fracking. What I am against is what the people of Longmont are against which is paying for stuff that people in other cities get the benefit of. I'm not for fracking, but what I am for is protecting the people of Longmont from it. If Joe Salazar succeeds in forcing us to go to battle with those people because they're drilling underneath the city of Longmont and we lose that battle, then it could have us back to a situation where we have a well pad five miles from the swim beach at Union Reservoir inside the SUNY limits. And that might just be the beginning. And I'd also just like to end this little rant by saying that the sponsor of Senate bill 181 which is the law that not very good lawyer Joe Salazar is trying to use to get fracking bans for other cities. I do know that I don't want Longmont to have to pay for it so that somebody else gets a fracking ban. And that's why I wrote that column and it has nothing to do with city council business. Thank you, Mayor Bagley, just as a consideration of my colleagues as well as the city staff, I would like to let you know that I did participate in a panel for the Community Foundation of Boulder County Leadership Fellows Group this afternoon with State Senator Stephen Fenberg, State Senator Elect, Hawkeyes Lewis, County Commissioner Matt Jones as well as Boulder City Council member, Ginny Joseph. I did my best at all times to only relate council positions that were voted on and then making sure that all other positions were clearly my own as well as avoiding disparaging any staff members or council members even when baited directly. Outside of that, I would say that I was very encouraged by the other elected officials in what I felt to be synergy among the city, county, and state level elected officials as far as to some really good things that are going on at the state, county, and local levels for Boulder County at large, so thank you. That's Dr. Waters, you wanted to say something, okay? Well, I'd say good on Mayor Potem for not disparaging other council members or representing council positions, city and check for folks. Well, I just would, just a couple of thoughts. One is that I think the public invited to be heard portion of the agenda is one of the most important parts of the meeting. I mean, it was way more fun when we were in person and it's limited in this format, but I do think it's one of the great aspects of local government. It's the former government closest to the people and it's like every Tuesday night, it's a town hall. I just think it differentiates and distinguishes local government from other forms of government. When I get the chance to do that as a resident by writing a letter to the editor and people using their first amendment rights to criticize me for using mine and labeling it as whining, I just think that's an interesting commentary on how the process gets used. But just to set the record straight, I did write a letter to the editor. I didn't think anybody'd read it and I'm not certain that people commented on it I'd actually read it because it was really what I said was a total distortion what I heard tonight. For the record, I'm opposed to fracking inside our city limits and within 2,500 feet of our city limits. I voted for the 2012 fracking ban. I would vote for it again if it was on the ballot. We fulfilled our first obligation to Longmont residents and that is to act on the health of their health and safety. But my real opposition that I tried to assert as a resident not as a council member and I was explicit as well that I wasn't representing anybody's views but my own as a resident of Longmont. My objection was to a fundraising campaign to cover the costs for an appeal that would keep us as defendants in a lawsuit and have further deplete Longmont city resources to accomplish what we've already accomplished in a time of austerity. That was the concern. I'd love to be engaged with residents where we have a chance to go back and forth. It's interesting to have the comments where we can't respond when we're called out individually. Thanks for the opportunity, Mayor Bagley. Council Member Dile-Ferring. Yeah, so I wanted to add so last Friday I was in on that Zoom meeting and it was the special meeting for municipal officials with Governor Polis's response advisor. And it was really just, it was concerning to see the numbers, to see how we are progressively getting worse with this virus. But really it comes down to each one of us and our behaviors, our actions, washing your hands, taking this virus seriously, wearing your mask. You know, I keep asking questions about the sustainability. Let's look pinpoint specific for daycares, for schools, for different businesses that would warrant a different kind of structure for quarantine. But again, it's gonna come down to each one of us and our behaviors. Wearing your mask, social distancing, limit those gatherings. Do a little sacrifice on that end so we're not collapsing our economy, so we're not hurting our students, our children, and our mental health. So that's all I have to say. And we'll see everybody later. Thank you, bye-bye.