Council - Regular Meeting

Time being 6.15, I call to order the City of Glenwood Spring City Council meeting. It is June 18, 2026. This is a regular meeting for us tonight. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for being here. And Ryan, would you please roll call?

Mayor Dame.

Here.

Mayor Pro Tem Zielinski. Councilor Townsley. Councilor Schmall. Councilor Wymer. Here. Councilor Schachter. Here. Councilor Smith. Here. We have a quorum.

Thank you, Ryan. Second item in the agenda, disclosure of any counselor's conflict of interest. Does anybody have conflict of interest with any of the items in the agenda? We'll see none. I have the sign-up sheet next to me. That works.

Sorry to interject. I had a sidebar conversation with Counselor Smith. We need to run through something when we get to item 11. for him on a conflict that is not a conflict. But I just want to, I think it's better to address it now.

I asked you about that earlier. So yes, yes, let's do that. I made a note. No problem. Any changes to the agenda? And I think we have three. So I am pulling item Sorry, I got to make sure I do the right thing. Item E is pulled completely off the consent until the next meeting on July 2nd. Then I am pulling item F for a quick clarification from legal. And we're going to insert F right before 7. So we're going to make it item 6, actually, or 6B, if I will. And then we're also, no, then I have a counselor request of pulling another item. And I think that is counselor Townsley, please. When you mic on, there we go.

Yes. My, my request was to pull that for a quick discussion.

Okay. So I would, I wouldn't item B on the consent agenda.

Okay.

Yeah, I would need a motion and a vote of counsel for that. So please.

I would move to take item 6B out of the consent agenda to the regular agenda.

That sounds good. Thank you. Can I get a motion? Mayor Pro Temselinski?

I'll second that.

I mean a second. A motion and a second to pull it and discuss it. Any discussion on this? Any reason? Or should we just vote on it? Let's vote on it. I'll call for the question.

It passes unanimously.

All right. So we're going to make that item six C and inserted right before seven.

That was item B.

Okay. Excellent. That was the, uh, changes to the agenda. Um, item four, as always citizens appearing before council or items that are not on the agenda. And I have a sign up sheet here. Um, Okay, we have a few on here. You guys know the rules. You're going to come up. You're going to let me know who you are and whether you live in city limits or not. And you're going to get three minutes. And I hope I don't have to cut anybody off. So please be cognizant of your time. And we're going to start with Judy Haynes, please.

Hi, my name is Judy Haynes and I'm a resident of Glenwood Springs.

Thank you.

Third time's the charm. So I'm here to again talk about Midland Center. We've gone through all of the regulations, the zoning. We understand how the zoning is made. We understand that this particular tenant has been breaking rules from their own lease as well as our zoning and permits. We know that the city also, knowing that, has not sanctioned the landlord. In fact, nothing's being done. And I'm gonna talk to you here about the most important thing is the health and safety of people who are being detained at that particular center. We had a great meeting last week about health and safety and fire from the fire department and our police department. I got a lot out of it. Big thing that we're skipping right now is that there's health and safety violations that are endangering or could endanger people. When a fire comes, we see the burn scar. I was here in 2002 when that happened. Those people have no way of escaping. They have no way out. There's not a good plan for that. And all of the things that would make the place safer have been ignored. The building materials, the burn safety, all of those things have been ignored by the landlord. You guys know that. I know that. Now it's time to act. It's an obligation from the city to a promise to all of us citizens who will be treated the same. That if I was a landlord with Joe's Bar and Grill throwing drunks on the street every day, you guys would certainly sanction me. This needs to be acted upon. Now I'm going to talk about something that's even closer to my heart. It's the health and safety of the human beings. These people are here and they can't leave. They're our neighbors, our friends. When something happens to them, when a fire comes again and someone's hurt or killed, guess what? It's on you guys. All of us who knew for so long that this was a health and safety hazard. Do you know how much money the cave paid out when they had a child die knowing that they had safety issues with that ride? That's nothing compared to what we're going to have to pay out. And this is not forgivable. Not now. We cannot be forgiven. As long as you guys do not act to correct this, families will be hurt. It's on me. It's really on you. Thank you.

OK, thank you very much for being here.

Moving on to Mark Stevens.

I'm going to pass.

You're going to pass. OK, thank you. Larry Emery, please.

Good evening. My name is Larry Emory. I've lived in Glenwood Springs for more than 38 years. I've served the city on the Financial Advisory Board, Parks and Rec, Board of Variances, and on City Council, among other things. I now serve on the board of the Glenwood Springs Gun Club. I'm here tonight about the range closure. I want to start where the point I think gets lost in this. A gun range is a public safety facility. That's the whole reason it exists. It's a controlled, purpose-built place with berms, established rules, fire mitigation built so that shooting happens as safely as it possibly can. The gun club's everyday rules are stricter than stage two requirements, which is the highest that there are. We permanently ban rounds known to start fires or possibly do so. Tracers, incendiaries, armor-piercing steel core, along with exploding targets. Every day of the year, it's not allowed. We're currently under a stage one ban, a full step below those requirements, and we're still shut down. What I don't understand is this. Every other shooting range in Garfield County is open right now, Eagle County for that matter, now under that very same ban. Glenwood Springs Gun Club's the only one closed, and none of the fires that the city pointed to are started at the range or by anyone shooting there. Here's the part I'd ask you to weigh most carefully. Closing the range does not stop people from shooting. It simply moves them onto BLM, Forest Service, state truts, unincorporated county land where there are no berms, no rules, no fire mitigation of any kind. Supposing the safest, most controlled place to shoot in the county does not lower the fire risk, it actually raises it. I recently retired from Olin Corporation, which you might know better as Winchester and Browning Ammunition. They're the world's largest small arms ammunition manufacturer. I was one of 22 people they had nationwide representing their product. I know a little bit about ammunition. I've shot for the last 30 years sporting clays in South Canyon. I've handled thousands of firearms. I can tell you plainly a shotgun and target loads Won't start a fire. Can't do it. That's the kind of shooting we're talking about. What I'm asking for is simple, an open dialogue between the city and the gun club so we can work through this together in the spirit of public safety, which is exactly what the range was built for in the first place. I'll leave you with the heart of it. Right now, the city's closed to one place built to make shooting safe and left open every place it is not. I do not believe this is what anyone here intended. I'm asking you to take a fresh look at this with us. And can we open a dialogue? Can we have a meeting with council and our staff on this topic? Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you for your comments. Moving in. Let's see. Next one is Anthony Ramirez, please.

Good afternoon. I'm Anthony Ramirez. I'm from Battlement Mesa. I'm just here. I read yesterday about the zoning of the detention center that we've revoked, and I'm here to express my thoughts about if there are rules that say that detention center should not go through, I want you to enforce your rules. Beyond that, on personal concerns, as you know, as you can probably tell, I'm of Hispanic heritage and my family lives here and I'm afraid of personally of the ice getting a foothold here in Garfield County and this area becoming the epicenter of the like Minnesota became and I can't afford to have my family be treated like they were treated up there. Speaking for my family, my father is 99 years old. He fought against the Nazis in World War II. My brother fought in Vietnam. My wife's an armed veteran. And my family did not fight for a country where people can be drug out of their vehicles because of the color of their skin. And that shouldn't happen here. And I'm afraid if the ice gets a foothold here and start acting like this, then we could be subject to that type of treatment. And hopefully that's not the type of country I want to live in. I'd hope that that's not the type of country you want to live in either. So I want you to be very careful about how we proceed with cooperating with ice. I'm sure that once the elections are done, I mean, they've been quiet right now. But when those are over with, we don't know what's gonna happen after that. They got another $70 billion. We'll see what's gonna happen. We do not want this country to become like it was up in Minnesota. We don't want our county to become like that. So please consider what you're doing when you authorize things like their detention center. We don't need guys with masks and machine guns running around here, parking outside our schools. We don't need things like that here. So don't open the door. You don't want to be the person that says that you open the door and let them in. Colorado is one of the states they're going to hit. So beware what you're doing. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you for being here. Thank you very much. Okay. Moving on to Ashley Stauff.

Good evening, my name is Ashley Stahl and I'm a homeowner here in Glenwood Springs. A rule is a rule only if it applies to everyone. For 22 years, the city has ignored a facility at 100 Midland Avenue. Neighbors filing open records requests discovered it had operated that entire time without a valid certificate of occupancy. And looking closer, we found something else. People were being held there for longer than the special use permit allowed in windowless cells on metal seats in cold air well past the 12-hour limit. Federal records documented it at least 11 times in a single year. we brought it to staff we were dismissed so we proved it and staff still recommended no action planning and zoning looked at that evidence and voted five to one to revoke the permit that decision is final and no one appealed it The owner of that building is not the federal government. It is a private landlord, an LLC tied to a man named Jeffrey Gillespie. We watched his name sit on the Zoom screen for hours the night of the hearing. He heard what was said and he chose not to say one word in his own defense. He never answered your notice. He never appealed. He thinks that he is above the law. Instead of enforcing this the way you would with any other building, the city has invented a new process where the answer is apparently to do nothing. Why is this city making an argument on behalf of an out-of-state Florida landlord? Why will this city not do something? We are told the supremacy clause ties your hands. With respect, who gives a shit? Rules were broken. Enforce them. Like you would with any of the people living in this community. Any additional legal question that applies, a court can sort out later, but that does not apply to a private landlord anyways. And here's what makes this worse. Your own city attorney has said the city could enforce against the property owner and that it may be easier than fighting the federal government. In fact, he called it the area we should push on. So why is the city not pushed? Further, after 22 years of mistake after mistake on this one building, why are we still being told to trust city staff? They missed it for two decades. Citizens found it, not staff, and staff has literally fought us at every step of the way. When will the city hold its own people to account instead of saying, I trust they know what they're doing, when if they did, they would have done it 22 years ago? And don't let anyone tell you this building is safe. On the morning of the hearing, the city produced a certificate of occupancy signed by an inspector with no authority to issue it, listing a building classification that does not exist with none of the required fire inspections. It's not just paperwork. Just weeks ago, the Paradise Creek fire burned less than five miles from this site. This valley has lost people to fire before. If those flames had reached this building, the people locked inside would have had no way to get out. And what happens when there's a fire and someone dies in there? You all will have known. We all will know. So enforce the law the same way you would for any of us. Stand with this community and not an absentee landlord who won't even come to speak up for himself. Be the council that finally gets it right. Thank you.

Thank you for your time. And moving on with Mary Zabel.

Thanks, Tracy. I wrote sloppy. I'm Tracy Zalvo from Carbondale. I also want to start with saying that I don't want ICE in my community, but what I'm here to talk about is the Axon contract. I was very disappointed to learn about that contract. Replacing one mass surveillance tool with another is not what I had in mind when I shared my concerns about FLOC. Claims that working with Axon will reduce crime and increase safety are often substantiated from industry-funded studies and are promoted by those trying to sell the products. Regarding ALPRs, we hear anecdotal stories about car thefts and kidnappings. How often are those things happening in our community? What is guaranteed is that this contract ensures that we as private citizens, all of us, will be mass surveilled. Empirical evidence shows that what actually reduces crime and increases public safety are investments in education, housing, and jobs. Let me share a little bit about the company we will be doing business with. In 2025, Axon fulfilled $73 million in federal contract obligations, including $3.1 million in new ICE contracts. In 2026, they are expected to receive $220 million in taxpayer funding for a single ICE taser contract. Axon is currently being sued by its shareholders for lack of transparency when it comes to their political spending. And last year, they spent $2.4 million lobbying the federal government. And isn't that about the amount of money we're going to be giving to them? Additionally, Donald Trump is enriching himself via Axon. He purchased $1 to $5 million in shares in February of this year and has made additional purchases after that. In June 2022, 9 out of 12 members of Axon's AI Ethics Board resigned. The following is an excerpt from their statement. For years, the board has warned Axon against the use of real-time, persistent surveillance in its products. Yet Axon has proposed a degree of surveillance that is sweeping. This type of surveillance undoubtedly will harm communities of color and others who are over-policed and likely well beyond that. This is their ethics board. This is who you are trusting to keep our community safe. Once these technologies are in place, there is no walking them back. ALPRs aren't the only mass surveillance tool in this contract. FUSIS is a real-time surveillance aggregation platform that unifies live feeds from the city's own cameras, body cameras, drones, and license plate readers with privately owned cameras registered by businesses and residents, including ring doorbell cameras. Sarah Parity, who is a Denver City Council member, stated, unless we think that governments and large companies are 100% trustworthy, all of the time, mass surveillance is very concerning. I to attended the public safety event on June 10 and it was clear that our Community has concerns about wildfire danger. And the members of our Community who are on house, what do we think investing in Ai does to solve these problems Ai uses data centers water usage and takes jobs away from individuals who may then struggle to pay for housing. So. I just want to say, why are we complying in advance, where we have a government that is hiding behind secrecy, classified files, and redaction, while demanding that total visibility be into our finances, communications, movement, and behavior? We should not comply in advance. We should say no to mass surveillance. Thank you.

Thank you. Ellen Friedman.

Hi, my name is Ellen Friedman. I've lived in the Valley for over 30 years. I do not live in Glenwood, but I do view Glenwood as the critical part of our region. And I spend a lot of time and money here too. 10, 20, 30 years from now, when our grandchildren or possibly great-grandchildren ask us, what did we do during that dark period in America's history when community members were taken off the streets from their homes and workplaces and put into inhumane conditions, never to return to their families again? What will we say to them? Did we look away in fear and shame? Or did we use every bit of our power, no matter how small it seemed at the time, to fight for what was legally and morally right? Council members, Why aren't you enforcing the Glenwood Springs Planning and Zoning Commission's revocation of the special use permit for the ICE detention facility at 100 Midland Avenue, which is owned by a private landlord? And since the facility continues to operate as a detention center, despite the permit revocation, Why aren't you concerned about the health and safety of our neighbors detained at the facility? Have you served the landlord with a cease and desist for unauthorized use and life safety violations? Have you fined the landlord for noncompliance? In the words of the historian Timothy Snyder from his 20 Lessons on Tyranny, I'm just going to read the first one, don't worry. Number one, do not obey in advance. Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead. about what a more repressive government will want and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do. Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on with Auden Schindler. I think I said that somewhat correct. Thank you.

I'm Auden Schoenler. I live in Basalt. I was on Basalt Town Council for four years, so I feel your pain, and it is pain sitting here on a beautiful evening. I'm here about the detention center on Midland. I've got two college age kids and I've raised them with dad-like aphorisms. One is don't be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Another is if you're doing manual labor and the boss man goes away, lean on your shovel. Another is if you have the ability to help somebody who is suffering or in harm's way or danger, you're obligated to act. And that's not you should consider it, it's you're obligated. And it seems to me, The reason I'm here is selfish because I believe that by talking to you, I can convince you to enforce code on this ICE facility and close it down. And I think you have the opportunity, you have the power, and therefore the obligation to do that. It's not just a violation of the law, but it's a moral violation, and in some cases, a constitutional violation. The gentleman who spoke movingly before us, Mr. Martinez, he's an American citizen, and he's scared for his family. That's the kind of harm being done. So I'm asking for your help in this. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you very much for being here. Moving on to Fran Oros.

Hi, my name is Teran Oroz. I've lived here all my life, and so I don't have any questions like these guys are having. I've spoke to John Hasselman, Aaron, about the e-motor cycles that are going up and down the bike path, and I got answers on that tonight, so I'm not going to touch that. First and foremost, the fire that happened the other night. I was on Carbondale Fire Department for 15 years, bought Storm King, I bought Coal Seed. Again and again and again. You guys are absolutely, law enforcement, fire department, everybody's failing. West Glenwood gets shut down, and I can tell you right now, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when that fire comes down there and kills thousands. It's not a couple. It's going to be thousands. This fire was minimal. We didn't have a bunch in my neighborhood, but the last fire we had did. Guy actually pulled a gun out there. You guys have got to get West Cleveland shut down as soon as this happens and get them out of there. Unless you're emergency services or you're a local, you shouldn't be out there. Because I'm telling you, it shut down. My son ended up out at our house and he left at 830 when they reopened the highway. It took him an hour and 15 minutes to get from my house to I-70, which is just behind the mall. So I don't know what you guys want to do about that, but I have a problem with it. And I'm telling you, I fought both those fires. My family had to leave without me. And I don't want that again. I don't want it for anybody. And I sure don't want to see a bunch of people die because they're not getting it done to shut that down as soon as it happens. The other thing I have issue with, more important to me, is that the bike path you guys put out, going out by the tram. So this is the second time. Midland has... The same thing. You guys put a 10 foot wide sidewalk out there. Why in the hell do you need a 10 foot sidewalk? I could drive my semi down that. Why in God's creation do you need that? And you narrowed the lanes there. So the big trucks are not going to be able to get in and out of here. And I got into it with somebody on Facebook the other night about it. And they're like, well, we shouldn't have the big trucks in there. Well, who do you think brings the goods in here? I just don't understand why you need a bike path that big. I'm tickled to death that there's a new bike path out there because I ride it and when it's wet and I'm literally riding my bike every day. And when it's wet out there, it sucks to ride. But to have a 10 foot sidewalk, just and I know it's petty. But, you know, I had issue. I had conversation when you guys put the 27th Street, none of you guys were sitting here, the 27th Street roundabout out there. I offered for those folks to get in my semi and ride through that roundabout and see what a fail it is. My semi trailer is 40 feet long. My tractor is 175 inches. It's minimal. You can't get through there without going the other lane to deal with that. It's not going to change now. I understand that. But this 10-foot sidewalk, just for the life of me, I don't understand it. I appreciate you guys' time.

All right. Thank you very much. Laurie Chase, please. I know.

Hi, I'm Laurie Chase, Cowden Drive. And thank you for all that you do. This is such a difficult job. Thank you. I urge you to reconsider the recent decision, allowing the extension of city water lines, so the me acres property and unincorporated garfield county. During the June 4 2026 meeting several Council members express concerns that voter approved measures limiting annexation authority. have constrained the city's ability to control growth. Whether one agrees with those measures or not, they were approved by the citizens because residents wanted a direct voice in the major growth decisions of this community, our community. What concerns me the most is that council approved extending water infrastructure before there appears to be clearly defined development proposal. As presented, there are no firm plans for what Garfield County may ultimately approve on this property. Yet the city has already agreed to extend water service. The public heard verbal assurances that the development could provide benefits such as additional fire hydrants and TAP fees revenue. However, verbal promises are not binding commitments. TAP fees are designed to support city's water infrastructure through the enterprise fund. They are not a profit center for the city. Before extending municipal resources beyond city limits, residents deserve to know exactly what's being proposed and what guarantees exist to Glenwood Springs. This development would occur in the county outside city's direct control. Once water service is extended, future decisions regarding density and build out and additional growth may largely rest with Garfield County. Without a detailed and approved development plan, the city is effectively making long-term commitment without fully understanding ultimate impacts. Growth also has consequences. Glenwood Springs faces finite natural resources, particularly water. We may currently possess adequate water rights. Water rights alone do not guarantee future water availability. As climate conditions change and drought conditions become more frequent, we must exercise caution when committing additional water resources outside city limits. At a minimum, I believe council should postpone further action. until a specific development plan has been submitted and reviewed. Garfield County's anticipated approvals and density allowances are clearly understood. The long-term impacts on Glenwood Springs water system have been fully evaluated. Any public benefits promised by the developer are documented and in enforceable agreements. Thank you very much.

All right. Thank you, Lori. Moving on to Pat Helling. Okay, thank you. And then the next one, I cannot read your first name. I can read this. The last name is Solomon. Pass. Okay, thank you. Julie Bombers Bank. Bombers back. Sorry. Okay, excellent.

Good evening, Council members. My name is Julie Bombers back. I live in neighboring Carbondale, and I've been a part of our valid community for over the past 20 years. I'm here tonight among fellow community members because this ongoing issue of 100 Midland Ave affects more than a single building or tenon. It affects more than the hundreds of people who have been detained there over the past 22 years. It affects public trust in this city's willingness to enforce its own codes and protect public safety. And public safety must include everyone. The concerns voiced to you this evening are not new. They've been brought forward repeatedly from diverse community perspectives. Yet the underlying violations remain unresolved and unaddressed. Six weeks after the revocation of the special use permit, an out of state private property owner continues to profit from a use the city has determined is no longer permitted. When known violations persist without action, it raises serious questions among all of us about accountability and equal enforcement of the law. And at this point, the city has allowed a building to remain out of compliance Council members, I am asking you to enforce the code against the private owner of sweet to 10 and address the occupancy violations that the city has long known about now enforce the revocation no entity steps forward to appeal the revocation. Have staff take action. This is and it has been unpermitted detention use. Address the building and fire code issues under group I3 standards that have gone unresolved. Require missing inspection records. The health and safety of every single person who enters that building as a detainee is at risk. Apply the rules equally. As others have asked, treat this private property owner as you would any other in the city. This building is privately owned and local codes still apply. Provide the community with a written response on the record and a clear timeline for action. Build back trust within the community because trust has been broken. Council members, this issue has been before you for some time now. The community has done its part by showing up, doing research, asking questions, demanding accountability, holding ourselves accountable and holding others accountable. Now it is time for the city to do its part. Thank you very, very much for your service, for your time and for your consideration.

Thank you for being here. And next one is John Banks.

I live in the city. I'm John Banks and I started Keep Glenwood Glenwood. Friends told me I should listen to your last meeting. I'd like to assure you that our charter amendment was not poorly thought out. It was carefully considered and deliberately crafted. You were concerned about unintended consequences. We think the effects of the amendment are exactly what we intended. You said that it tied council's hands. Yes. People liked it because they had seen a steady decline in our quality of life as our council and city administration pursued aggressive growth over the last two decades. Development that only made Glenwood bigger, not better. The city never seemed to hear our concerns and people wanted to take back some control. You suggested that it should be repealed. It seems like that would be difficult. It was overwhelmingly popular. As far as I can tell, it was the second biggest landslide vote in the city's history. And of course, we would oppose any repeal. The people you represent in Ward 4 voted for it overwhelmingly. So did the people you represent in Ward 5, as well as all the other wards. The people spoke loud and clear. I don't understand why you want to work against their clear wishes. I suggest a different approach. Run to the front of the parade. Embrace the spirit of Keith Glenwood Glenwood. Represent us. It's all about quality of life. For each measure you consider here, ask, does this make life better for the people who live in Glenwood Springs now? If you can answer yes, do it. If not, why would you want to? It's not clear that your waterline extensions and rescuing a trailer park halfway to Carbondale passed that test. Remember, you were elected by the people of Glenwood Springs to represent the people of Glenwood Springs. Not Newcastle, not Silt, not Carbondale, not Garfield County. Represent us. And please understand, you can still annex property and develop city-owned land. We have lots of elections. Put it on the ballot and explain how your plan improves our quality of life. If you can't explain that, well, whenever something comes up here, just keep asking, does this make life better for the people who live in Glenwood Springs now? Does this make life better for the people who live in Glenwood Springs now? Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to Dave Minter.

My name is Dave Minter. I live here in Glenwood Springs. I used to be a teacher and a school principal before I retired. I taught first through sixth grade classes and all those. And I wanted to talk a little bit about doing the right thing in fairness. This is all about the detention center situation. We had people that didn't follow rules and guidelines as tenants and as leasors. And I was really surprised to hear that there really wasn't any follow through from the city council. So I want to tell you a little bit. Anybody know anybody that's in second grade right now? Anybody know? Or have a second grade or fifth grade? I can tell you that those two grades are all about fairness, kids that are that age. And even with big federal government issues, if you got second graders together and say, what's fair and what's the right thing, they would tell you without bias. Fifth graders have a little more knowledge, but they're still innocent enough to believe in the golden rule and doing the right thing. So if the city council has any issues about should we enforce this? Should we follow through? If you talk to me, I'll try to find a group of second graders. And it sounds funny, but they will give you the right thing to do every time, because they're not tainted yet like we are as an adults. Fifth graders have a much clearer vision. They understand whether there's a Santa Claus or not. And they absolutely understand. They're not adolescents yet. So we all know what the right thing to do is. It's right or wrong. I had a college friend call me recently and said, you know, I give up. There's nothing we can do to change it. Talking about federal government. And I said, yeah, that's not right. And then somebody else just said to me yesterday, a close relative, they ought to do something about it. Said, you got the wrong pronoun. We, you're here because of we. Everybody's here because it's we, not they. We're here to do something about it. We just want you to do the right thing. If you have any questions, I'll try to put you in touch with a group of second graders or fifth graders. And if you say we'll do what they recommend, I think this will all work out. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And last one on the list is Debbie Burrell.

hi my name is debbie Brule I live outside of Glenwood I live in carbondale but, like others, I spend lots of time and money here in Glenwood. i'd like to start by talking about the axon surveillance contract, it seems to me that the process of approving the contract was rushed through way too quickly and without adequate due diligence. I would be very interested to know if you all reviewed the letter written by the ACLU of Colorado along with three dozen other organizations that they sent to the Denver City Council in March when Denver was considering a contract with Axon. I'd like to read a few things from that letter since it outlines a major concern that many of us have. Flock and other AI-powered surveillance technologies are rapidly growing in both capability and power, while regulations lag behind and remain largely non-existent. In 2019, Axon's own AI and Policing Technology Ethics Board, a group that was established by the Axon company itself, reported that there is insufficient regulatory oversight for the technology and the impact of ALPRs falls disproportionately on low-income people and people of color. In 2022, nine of the 12 members of that ethics board resigned from their position because Axon was ignoring their concerns. The board members who resigned decided that they had lost faith in axons ability to be a responsible partner. The letter also states the city cannot rely upon third party vendors to set the necessary protections and guardrails around their products that responsibility must be held by you, the city council. I hope you all will read that letter in its entirety. It's very enlightening. It's easy to find online. I'm also here tonight to share that I am very concerned that the city seems to have abdicated all responsibility for doing anything about the fact that the special use permit for the detention facility at the Midland Center has been revoked. The SUP was revoked for a reason. The facility is not following health and safety standards that the city itself has adopted. Even when the facility was only holding people for 12 hours, it was still not compliant with the I-3 safety standards required of any detention facility. And as others have noted, that's particularly scary in this wildfire season. The city should not be allowing a private landlord from Florida to be profiting from endangering the lives of our neighbors. The landlord should be held accountable for following the city's building and safety codes, and it's your job to hold them accountable. So I urge you to do so. Thank you very much.

Thank you for being here. So this concludes the list, but I'm going to give people a chance that showed up later. Is there anybody that would like to come forward and speak? We have two more. Okay, please. You start. State your name or do you live in city limits or not?

Sorry.

Hello, my name is Zody Woolsey and I do live in Glenwood. So this is regarding the new cameras. When your community urges you to get rid of something, it's very telling of your intentions when you simply pick an adjacent option. I will preface by saying the rhetoric that our racist sheriff uses whenever he says the ALPRs have helped him prosecute gang members and end gang crimes is actually a well-known rhetorical take that was designed by people online, right-wing Nazi groups, especially on 4chan, which I used to participate in, so I know firsthand. And it's specifically designed to make it sound like they're doing something big and grand and secret, whenever actually what they're doing is going after and prosecuting our neighbors based on how they're looked, beating and abusing them. And there are plenty of videos of this online, plenty of evidence. Do you seriously think that a license plate scanner will prevent gang violence? They can get burner cars, burner phones. They're not going to use normal license plates. That's absolutely ridiculous to assume that that would ever help. It takes people on the ground talking to the community and actually figuring out what is happening and not just assuming that people are part of a gang and going after them for no reason. Furthermore, you are outsourcing our safety, the safety of your community, to a soulless company. Not only that, but you misrepresented the nature of this contract entirely when it's publicly described as a simple body cam contract, which it is not. It includes an integrated surveillance platform with 27 Axon body cameras, 27 tasers, four Axon Outpost automated license plate reader cameras, a Skydio X10 drone and first responder dock system, a Skydio R10 control drone and an Axon AI error report writing software. So they won't even write their own reports anymore. And an Axon evidence cloud storage. All of this clearly shows that you wanted to hide this from the public or someone wanted to hide this from the public for some reason. I don't know if someone's getting paid here for this massive $2.4 million deal that you guys are seeming to make whenever you couldn't use that amount of money on something else that actually helps the community instead of harasses and beats and puts them in torture camps. Just because you fangirl and get hard over the idea of someone being surveilled by drones, controlled by racist cowards, doesn't mean that you need to force your sick, disgusting preferences upon your community. You don't even have control over the data that this collects. These servers are not stored here. They're probably using SQLite or Mongo database, which most people don't know. But this is trash. This is what most tech startups like this use. It's not secure enough for HIPAA that's been decided before, even though these platforms still use it anyway. It's not secure. And all of this data could easily be accessed by a paid contract or even an intern working at one of these companies and could leak it, as has happened with Flock and plenty of other of these surveillance camera systems, because none of us have control over it. It's controlled by some random tech bro asshole in some rich house that he got for spying on random civilians. You're the city, so stop self-harming. It makes you look stupid and cowardly. Thank you. All right. Thank you.

And I think we had one more hand up. Please come forward, state your name and whether you live in city limits or not. You got three minutes.

My name is Lori Raymond, and I've lived in Glenwood Springs for 23 years. I'm here to just speak a little bit. I wasn't really planning to speak, but I want to reiterate things people have said about the detention facility. But first I want to say that when this body decided to revoke those permits, I have, I was never so proud to be a Glenwood springs resident as when you did that, I think. The city attorney explained that it was not a slam dunk if you did it, we may not be able to enforce it but here's the thing we've all seen. What happens when people stand up and say, don't do the wrong thing just because you think you will lose? We don't know that. But even if we did, we would have stood up for something valuable, the will of the community to do the right thing. This facility has violated our local laws, our conditions for health and safety. There's no need to reiterate all of that. But I want to just remind you, I emailed everybody I know. I've been an activist off and on all my life. And everyone said, wow. glenwood springs little glenwood springs that's brave well I guess we're called on to be brave and it you know I'm not saying that we need to you know die in the streets like they did in Minneapolis. but we need to stand up and that's risky, but it's worth it. And thank you for having done that. And I encourage you to stand by that decision and enforce it to the best of our ability. And we're all with you if we do that.

Okay, thank you very much for being here. One last call to see if somebody wants to come forward for a comment. Okay, we'll see none. I will close the public portion of tonight's meeting. And here's what we're going to do. We're not going to respond as a council to the ICE and detention facility issue because we may still have pending litigation coming up. Who knows? But what I will do for you is I will call on Steve Boyd for an update of where we are with a statement and possible moving forward with other things we had talked about.

Yeah, so counsel asked us to get a second legal opinion. I reached out and talked to CML, Colorado Municipal League, and one of their attorneys. I then was referred to another attorney who I also talked to. The answer that I got in both cases was, I don't want to take a position on this because it's too dangerous for our firm, but I will say you're not wrong. I think that's a direct quote, almost in both cases. So going forward, I'll seek one more. It's a call that I've got out that I haven't heard back from yet, and I'll update counsel when I hear from that person.

So hopefully by maybe next meeting, we'll have some sort of a better idea, hopefully.

Yeah, he said he was out of town this week and would be back next.

Okay, excellent. So as you can see, things are moving, but we got to make sure we do our due diligence before we do anything. So with that, I will bring the other... Um, comments that we heard back to council and see if anybody wants to respond. And I see one light up and we'll start with, uh, Councilor Smith. Thank you.

One of the later speakers spoke of being proud of the city government for particular action. Uh, I feel very proud to see so many people show up and talk about a variety of issues and to express themselves so eloquently and so sincerely. It makes this kind of work much more informed and much more gratifying. So thank you very much for being here.

All right. Thank you. Any other responses from council to anything we heard? The only question I have, and that was about the gun range, is there a particular reason we just did it because of fire restriction one or why did we choose that?

Yeah, no, that's correct. Having said that, I'd be more than happy to meet with the gun range. I'm easy to find. Reach out to me and we can set something up.

Okay, excellent. Thank you. If there's nothing else, then I see nothing. I want to thank you all for being here as always. We do value your input and we hear you all. Some things we can talk about, some things we can't. Some things we refer, we try to get answers for you. It's a process and we're hopefully part of the correct process. So thank you. Thank you for being here. We will move on to item number five now on the agenda, which is council announcements. And for that, we'll start with Mayor Pro Tem Zielinski.

OK, so just real quick, I want to thank our city staff yesterday. They took a day out of the office away from their regular duties and participated in some cleanup along the I-70 corridor. This action saved our city about $90,000, which is what it would have cost to contract that out. Apparently there's a lot of regulations and when you see adopt a highway, it's actually not volunteers because of the laws around, you know, being next to the highway at the speeds that we travel. And so because of an agreement that our public works director has with CDOT, we were able to make arrangements. And I thought that was pretty cool that I think there was about 11 or 12 city staff out there in almost 100 degrees picking up trash. And so I was pretty proud of them. And I wanted to say thanks. And then also, just in case today wasn't enough and you want more than three minutes, there will be two opportunities to chat with council this weekend. Friday night, 4.30 till 6, I believe. And Saturday morning, 10 a.m. till noon. So at Strawberry Days, there'll be a city tent and I will be there. I think several other council members will be there. So we'd love to see you.

Okay, thank you. Any other announcements? Councillor Smith, please.

As Councillor Zinzzi just mentioned, Strawberry Days is 1,070 minutes away. It is the biggest toast and jelly days you've seen in any community. It's a remarkable experience, and city government is assisting greatly in a large fashion about how to get us there. With city help and city policies shifts and personnel shifts, there's going to be hosted bicycle parking in a shady end of the park, free shuttles from parking lots at the high school, downtown elementary school, city hall, and the west side mall will get you there without struggling to take your car along. The city's on-demand dial-a-ride vehicles will be running as usual, but they'll have all of their vehicles going. And Ride Glenwood Springs itself, the regular fixed route bus, will be running longer hours with every 15 minutes frequency during the peak time of the events. And as Erin just mentioned, also the highlight of the entire weekend will be that city council members will be available to hear from you, positive or negative. So take advantage of that one. Coming up on the heels of Strawberry Days is Bike There Day. It's a part of Colorado Bike to Work Day, but in Cleveland Springs, you don't have to go to work to ride your bike. You can write it wherever your practical destination is. You've seen some orange posters around that will give you a computer link to find out where things are going and what's going on. But more to the point, In Glenwood Springs, you can go to two places and get a free burrito. Ride your bike and go to set the corner of 7th and 8th, funny as that sounds, or the river trail at the corner of 23rd Street. There's going to be food, prizes, drawings, and just plain fun. So ride your bicycle. Thank you.

All right. Thank you very much. Councillor Smith, any other announcements? I got a quick one, and this has been sitting here all afternoon. As of today, the reconstructed Hanging Lake Trail is open officially. I was honored and invited. by a whole bunch of people this morning to say a few words. And it was a great ceremony. The Forest Service was there, the Colorado Lottery, who funded the project. We had GoCo, forget what that stands for right now. But anyway, a whole bunch of people were there. And the city of Glenwood, amongst other people, actually received an award from the Glenwood Lottery. And it is for excellence in use of lottery funds. They spend a lot of money every year on such projects, and they thanked us for using their money on the reconstruction of the Hanging Lake Trail. You should go check it out. The trailhead alone is magnificent. It completely changed. It was a great project. $4.9 million has been spent on the reconstruction of Hanging Lake. Lots of volunteer hours. The head ranger was there. She was great. She explained the whole thing. It was a great ceremony. I was really glad to be part of that. So I wanted to let you know about this. And I'm going to have to argue with Councillor Smith. I think the most important thing about Strawberry Days is that we're also serving beer. on Saturday afternoon from 1.30 to 4. So if you don't get a chance to yell at us or be nice to us during the tent hours when we're in the city tent, come grab a beer and say hi there. Yeah, drink a bunch of beer and then come grab you this. That's how we do this. So I think that concludes the announcements and we're moving into consent agenda. And as we heard earlier, we have some changes there. So I am entertaining a motion to move the consent agenda forward without item B, E, and F. The items remaining are the council minutes from June 4th, the award request for proposal 2016-15P, the award request for proposal 202614P, the resolution 202615, letter of support for C3 grant application, and the ordinance 202612 to repeal and replace section 0801. Can you read the whole title? Ordinance 2026-12, an ordinance of the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, repealing and replacing Section 080-010-060 of the Glenwood Springs Municipal Code regarding utility disconnection notices, second reading. So with that, I'm entertaining a motion. Mayor Pro Tem Solinsky, please.

I move to approve the consent agenda as you read it.

Excellent, thank you. And Councillor Townsley? Second it. Okay, my motion is second. Any discussion on the consent agenda as it stands?

You guys still have your mics on.

Is that an indicator or not? Okay, it's nothing. Okay, great. I'll call for the question.

It passes 7-0.

Thank you, Ryan. Okay, moving into our first moved item, which is also our first action and or presentation, which is item B from the consent agenda. And that is a grant proposal for workforce housing impact report. And Watkins is probably going to tell us about it.

Good evening, Council. Don't have a presentation for you all, but what we're proposing to do here is take $50,000 that they're offering us from the state, offering us on the condition that it is and type of use that they're willing to approve. An indication so far are that they would for this impact report funding that we've described in the staff report. What we're trying to do is just create a better understanding of how we're using our 2C funds, our workforce housing funds, and go kind of beyond what we've done so far, go beyond the dollars spent and the dollars spent per unit and kind of maybe look at things like vehicle miles traveled savings as a result of the work that we've done through our housing programs and the money spent. time savings for families, individuals, better operations or experiences for local businesses, impacts to our parking, local household wealth creation. Those are some examples that I came up with off the top of my head for things this impact report might look at. But the idea is that we would hire a consultant to create this impact report and look at the funding, how we've spent our funding in the last four years to kind of guide us in the future and have a better understanding of how we're doing, you know, whether that's in positive or negative light.

Okay, thank you. Any questions to the staff at this point? Councilor Townsend.

Just one quick question. And I was the one that asked to get this pulled off. But these reports, I'm assuming, are being done for many other cities. I mean, the money was available through Prop 123 that if we did things on our side, hit certain trademarks, then this would be available to us. Is this being done all over the state, is my understanding? A lot of different people would be doing this?

The specific thing we're proposing is common, doing impact reports. understanding how the impacts of your spending. But there's flexibility in how we do this. This is part of a program through DOLA called the LPC, Local Planning Capacity Grant Program. So it has to fit under the auspices of that program. And so this is kind of the idea that we've come up with because we've heard some interest from you all in the past about looking at this kind of thing. And so this is kind of the best thing that we could come up with to fit under that program.

But I guess my question is, is this, you know, can I assume that probably the Silverthorne or Durango or every other town, there's a lot of other towns that might be producing a similar report?

I think that's fair to say. Yes, sir.

Then would we have any, if we end up doing it, are we going to at least make that available to anybody else that wants to use it? And if we didn't do it for some reason, would we be asking other people to see what the results of their reports were?

um yes i imagine it would be a report that would be widely available we might not have the you know excel formulas that back it up available but the report at least okay thanks okay thank you counselor small i think it's great that we're analyzing how we're spending that money with the impacts positive negative and i think another category should be no impact thank you that's a great point

Thank you. Councillor Schachter.

I guess a question Watkins. I believe the Housing Commission saw several Dave Kuntz, formats and impact reports from other communities that were helpful and kind of met the charges some of the charges that Council said about Okay. Dave Kuntz, What is happening with the money, how is it impacting I was pleased to see this, but are we compelled to spend on the consultant versus using energy and creativity in house.

I think there are some real benefits to hiring a consultant for this. There are consultants who specialize in this kind of work. And the hope is that we could get some help creating it and then create kind of a template or a plug and play kind of report that we can do this for ourselves in the future so we're not creating additional expenses. But some of those environmental benefits, there's some expertise to be found in the consultant realm, I think.

Along with that process, and I'm wondering, From a communication point of view, is it clear at this point or can it be made clear before we commit wholly to the consultant that the communication, the expectations of council for an impact report, and the expectations of the housing commission for an impact report also align with the consultant? and I'm not sure how we manage that process rather than just going to a consultant first. So I'm wondering about how we align those expectations as far as what the report should show us.

Okay, thank you. Anybody, any other questions? Councillor Smith. All questions. Only questions. Okay, Councillor Weimer.

It's hard to raise a lot of dust on this. It's $50,000 of state money. However, was there discussion Watkins around other options, other uses for this money? I know it's like this local planning capacity grant. So there's probably, there's probably lanes around this, right? Did you, was there any discussion or thoughts of maybe other options or was it, this is what we're going to do is what makes the most sense?

Yes, we did think about other options that might have supported mobile home park preservation. But in the end, we thought that that was just a little bit too nebulous. And given that some of our recent mobile home park preservation efforts have been outside the city, that that wouldn't be a good use of funding.

Yeah. Thanks. Okay. Thank you. And I think it's already been said, I think you already said it, but I just want to make sure we don't pay anything. This is fully grant funded. Yes, sir.

Okay.

any more any more questions okay we'll see none i'll bring it back to council for a motion and item i guess this was item b on the kid center agenda counselor smith i'd be glad to move approval of this proposal should i say it more specifically somehow if item b

B, that had been on the consent agenda, item B, grant proposal for a housing impact report, and have some kind of qualifying comments when the time's right.

All right, thank you. We have a motion to approve. Looking for a second. Mayor Pro Tem Selinsky?

I'll second.

Okay, excellent. Any discussion? And your microphone's still on, Councillor Smith, so go.

I realize that my first observation probably should have been included in the motion, and that is to look for opportunity to spend less than $50,000, if possible. Adjust the motion if the council agrees or just... suggest that which seems to be the obvious suggestion in case there may be additional funding beyond the total contract amount that could be used for other purposes um also concur with councillor schachter's comment that we have a particularly bright and diverse housing advisory board which can figure things out on their own and it was because of that i was hesitant about spending money on somebody else to do that work but because the board generally seemed agreeable to this and be especially because of staff's suggestion that this may serve as a template that can be used in-house in the future that seemed to make it a little bit more worthwhile as an investment thank you all right thank you counselor townsley

A couple of things and just comments. And I realize that... you know, when I hear a comment, well, it's only $50,000 and it's state money. I mean, I pay state taxes every year. I have ever since I've been in Colorado. So I consider this to be my taxpayer money too, even though I'm sitting on the board of the Council of Glenwood Springs. So I really don't appreciate this is state money. There's no match from us. We have no responsibility to take it seriously. And I don't say we're not taking it seriously, but I do wonder if we're really, You know, is it necessary to spend this? Like we've said up here, it's like there's a board that takes a look at this stuff. Can we not say, yeah, this is good, this is not good, this is what we want to do. It appears to be what we want to do as far as what's on the people on the board. So I see this, you know, it's probably something that's going to be repeated. There's some counsel or consultant out there that's going, okay, I do these types of reports. He's going, this is going to be great. I'm going to get, I can do them for this city, this city, this city, this city, change the pictures, change the numbers, charge everybody $50,000. If nothing else, just from a standpoint of being good stewards of money, we could maybe get two or three of those reports and average amount. Okay, this seems to be working here. This is a positive on all these reports. This is a negative on all these reports. I just don't see it, even though, you know, I guess from a governmental standpoint of view, $50,000 is just a little bit of money. Mayor Mrakas, it's my tax dollars, because I pay I pay state taxes that your dollars you pay state taxes, I don't see that there's a need to spend $50,000 for this is something we could probably do in house or just have a discussion around the table so with that I would say that I can't support this motion.

City Council Chambers, Okay, thank you. City Council Chambers, county mayor pro tem silence.

City Council Chambers, So that's food for thought i'm in the interest of responsible spending of money i'm thinking you know. That board that you cited, their recommendation has been challenged by this board. And so I think it does seem to me prudent to have a third party with objective eyes to look at the decisions that we've made and evaluate their efficacy. And if we are moving in the correct direction, that will, for me at least, it will frame some of my future decisions. And so I feel that this is an opportunity for us as the two C funds are still a fairly new program that we're working with, to make sure that we're on the right track, that we're doing things the best way. It seems a worthwhile investment and a great opportunity for us to leverage the money that we have with some money that doesn't have to come from our budget, but still has value. So for that reason, I feel pretty comfortable supporting this motion.

Thank you. Councilor Schacht.

Watkins, I'm not sure the timeline to get this grant or is it merely issuing a letter by X date? Can you answer that before I continue to comment?

We do, unfortunately, have a pretty pressing timeline. It is an application that we have to make and prepare, and it's due June 30th. The state has been lenient with us. There was a deadline a couple of months ago, and then when we decided we wanted to pivot it to this, they gave us some some leniency, so we don't have a lot of time.

And should you be awarded the grant and for some reason we decide we don't want to use it or use it all, can it be given back?

It can. It can be delegated.

So my suggestion might be to support the motion with the caveat, I assume if you're hiring a consultant, there's an RFP. So to address commissions issues, some that I had about alignment, perhaps Councilor Townsley about, is it a good use of our money? Would it be reasonable to ask you to have us review the RFP once the commission has reviewed it before a final decision is made to proceed, even though we've been granted the money?

Yes, we can do that. And to be clear...

I don't know if the council agrees, but yeah.

Sure. So this is kind of a procurement question, whether you get an RFP or if there's another process. And it turns out for this amount of money, because for professional services, we don't have to do an RFP. If I'm hearing from the dais that that's desirable, then we can. But our procurement policy states that we need to get some quotes.

So, well, I guess... I don't want to get too technical. How do you decide who's going to provide you the value for the 50 grand? I don't care if it's an RFP, an application procurement, they must provide you and the commission something that qualifies them. Would it be reasonable to show that to us as well before a final commitment to see if we're in alignment?

I'll tell you in a minute.

I don't know. I don't know whether that impedes the process makes it impossible or makes it helpful. I'm asking for help on this.

Okay, thank you. Anybody else? Okay, we'll see none. Here's what I think. So the housing board looked at it, right? They said yes. We're looking at it. They looked at it. They picked the best way forward. I don't want to micromanage this. This is an application for a grant to see the impacts of how we're doing. And I personally feel like they're completely capable of figuring out how to do this. That's how I feel. I'm trying to get away from the minutia of things and just kind of stick to what we're actually here to do. And that's the greater picture. So to me, this is something we can use. The expertise can be hired because we don't have it. I have a feeling. So I think we should move forward with this. Thank you. Councillor Smith.

Perhaps a Goldilocks solution. I assume that this next step of that selection process would at least be discussed with the Housing Advisory Board. And that, I think, is a place where that expertise is found.

There you go.

Thank you.

Okay. If there's no more discussion, I'll call for the question. And by the way, the motion is to approve to apply for the grant. Yeah, this is just to apply for it. We don't even know if we're going to get it.

No, Councilor Townsend. Yes, Mayor Pro Tem Slinsky. Yes, Mayor Dame. Yes, Councilor Weimar. Yes, Councilor Schmoll. Yes, Councilor Smith. Yes, Councilor Schachter. It passes 7-6-1.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Ryan. And I think we have one more. I did this right. One more consent agenda item we're gonna have to discuss, and that is item F, and that is the resolution 2026-13, remote participation addition to the council handbook. And from what I understand, this is just a repair or fix in the language.

When we sent out the packet, thankfully, Councilor Cansley caught that we had missed some language in the attachment, paragraph 2.4. First sentence reads, upon approval of the entire council, And there should have been an insertion said at least one meeting prior comma. That's the change on this is on the temporary attendance that you would need to approve a meeting prior to the temporary if somebody was going to appear only for part of the meeting remotely. That you need to get that pre approved at a prior meeting. So that was the only change. And if that's acceptable, just need a motion to approve the resolution as amended.

So language has been repaired language is fixed. Okay. Mayor Pro Tem Selvanski.

I move to approve. Resolution 2026-13, remote participation, addition to the council handbook with revisions made by legal.

Excellent. I need a second. Councillor Townsend. Second that. And a second. Any discussion? Council's in. See none. I'll call for the question.

It passes 7-0.

Thank you, Ryan. All right. That concludes the agenda changes. And we are moving into official item 7 tonight. I'm just remembering something. Please remind me quick. Did I remove item 10 in agenda changes? Yes. Okay, then we're going to do it when we get there.

Okay, no worries. I missed that.

Sorry about that. Item seven, update on the Paradise Creek fire. And I kind of wish some people would have stuck around that had comments on that to listen to it, but it is what it is. Chief, please.

Thank you, sir. Good evening, councillors, Mr. Mayor. I'm Joseph Derris, your Chief of Public Safety. First of all, let me reiterate some of the comments you heard earlier. Thank you all for your service, because maybe after my comments, you won't be so friendly coming back at me about how things went down with that fire. I'll give you a brief overview. I've spoken about this will be the third time publicly I've spoken. So I apologize for some of you've already heard this. If you have questions, I'm certainly happy to talk about that. We're not perfect, but we do the best we can under the prevailing conditions. So as you know, we had a couple weeks ago, we had a fire out there in West Glenwood, just outside the city limits. And was now being called the Paradise Creek fire. Immediately after crews arrived on scene at that fire, there's very steep terrain, which required the necessity of aircraft to come in and help us suppress that fire. When that happens, the protocol is, particularly with rotary aircraft, they need to access water resources from the Colorado River. That requires the closure of the interstate entirely. That's the main reason that highway was closed. We did have fixed wing aircraft up there. They're commercial sized jets that carry fire retardant and other fire suppressing measures. But the winds were so prevalent or prevailing at that time, they were unable to fly that aircraft in there and deliver the suppressant that we needed. In these kind of fire situations, you may not know, but if you ever look up really high, you'll see it looks like a small private jet flying at very high altitude. And those are airborne aircraft air traffic controllers. They control all the other air assets that are flying in the area and make sure there's a common pattern of flight, the size of the flight, winds, and all the other conditions that could impact air operations. So we did have them airborne. They were keeping an eye on things from their vantage point. So we were able to pull a helicopter from another fire in the area and bring them down to Glenwood Springs to help us suppress that fire. Initially from the aircraft, it was estimated at 20 acres. At the end of the day, it turned out to be about four and a half. I'm not really sure how those calculations are made from that distance or what technology they use, but that's how that number was continuing to change. I was keeping our city manager updated pretty regularly with the information that was given to me. And I was at the command post with our incident commander, Battalion Chief Ryan Wyckoff. So as that fire progressed, it started moving from its initial point of origin up the steep mountainside there and moving to the west. One of my first questions, the incident commander, excuse me, to the east, to the east, I apologize, was how, what's the likelihood of this thing moving into Glenwood Springs proper on the very west end, Amy's Acres and somewhere out there? It's certainly possible, as you may have heard at our public safety presentation, embers are what typically are our biggest issue flying in and creating other fires. Certainly possible, but not likely. And so we were aware of that and we were able to get hose lines around basically a containment line to contain that fire within the boundaries that we had established. We had a number of other agencies coming to help us to include CDOT, CRFR, Colorado River Fire, and then our crews that we had here. Because we had crews leaving our immediate city limits, we had to bring other crews into Glenwood Springs to staff fire stations for any potential emergencies that were going on in town. As you can imagine, like I mentioned, that interstate got closed immediately for the aircraft, and we had fire crews on the westbound lanes of I-70 in the number two lane, which is the slow lane. But we have hose lines laying out there and fire engines and apparatus and people moving around quite a bit. That's also another reason why we needed to close that westbound side. Well, as soon as you do that, as you all have lived here for many years can appreciate, that grid locks traffic fairly quickly. We do have a plan in place for traffic incident management, but I need to really stress over and over and over. And I think we said this in social media several times. This was not an evacuation. We have an evacuation plan. This was not an evacuation. So as the highway closed, we started to continue to have all these people that time of day coming into our community. What would be optimum is for us to have asked CDOT to put up some electronic signs and say, you know, basically stay out of Glenwood Springs, have dinner in Basalt or Carbondale or wherever you're coming from. It's going to be a little while and stay up there. That did not happen. We also had a request with the state that they would close westbound I-70 in the Dotsero area to keep all those people from coming into our community. There was some discussion. problem with that. They executed, but then I think the traffic was released a little bit too early, earlier than they thought we needed that to happen. So then we had all that influx of traffic coming in. Ideally, we would release the bottleneck in Glenwood Springs first before we let everybody else into the town and get them moving. So that did not occur either. And when we institute these TIMSS plans, we're kind of at the mercy in some ways with CDOT because they control those highways. They were at the incident command. with us. One of the supervisors there is a little bit newer. I think this is his first major incident. This was not a fire that required incident management team. I've seen some comments around the community about this is IMT and they could have done a better job. This is not that. That's a, you know, coal seam fire or something, conflagration, something like that. This was not that. So anyhow, as all points were coming in and trying to get to the highway, all of those roads, that highway was closed. So then you start having these backups and backups and backups. And so people, it finally spills to the outer limits of the city. People are just stuck. I can appreciate that inconvenience. I was out there working until about nine o'clock myself. We had some of our young parking enforcement officers out there giving us a hand. And at one point, a gentleman got out and wanted to have a fistfight with me at the 114. So people were very, very angry and volatile. And I can appreciate that. But it's not a situation that we created. We're just trying to manage it and get people where they need to be. As we are moving traffic underneath the 114, it started to back up over there as well, near the Alta and the Arby's and all that, coming back up toward the Dairy Queen and up on Midland Avenue. People are trying to find other roadways around. There's just no other way out. If this were an actual evacuation, then we have an evacuation plan that I think you're all familiar with. We would have closed the entire highway, all four lanes, all the way out to the 133 in Dotsero. So we can move traffic out of Glenwood Springs using four lanes of traffic in one particular direction and out to the south going back out toward um or aspen or up valley if we needed to with the help of cdot the state patrol carpendale police and our own staff has been trained public works teams to be out there and they have certified flaggers to help us do that but again this was not that and so that's why that plan was not instituted to move everybody out If we were concerned about everybody's safety, we'd institute that evacuation plan that you've had in front of you for a long time to include the access to our A-line brakes. We have two of those, one down by the Toyota dealership and then one down further by First Street behind the pit stop car wash over there. So I think that's kind of it as an overview. I'm happy to take whatever questions you might have. I know there have been some, and I'll try to do my best to answer those, but that's kind of where we stand.

Okay. Thank you very much for your update. And just a quick question, since you mentioned it and my microphone is on. The evacuation plan.

Yes, sir.

What you explained with closing four lanes, A-line breaks, is that all written in the evacuation plan?

It's either there or it's in our traffic incident management plan that is called the TIMSS program, which we also have available. TMS? Yeah, TIMSS.

TMS, right? Yeah, TMS and evacuation. And both of those plans are on the city's website.

I can say for sure the evacuation plan is. I don't know about the TIMSS plan.

Are they easy to find? Because that's what I think people should go for. Look at our evacuation plan and our traffic management plan.

Agreed. And they are online. They're on the fire department's website. I don't know if they're on the city website. Yes, they are.

Okay. And I hope after you read those that you will realize that this was not an evacuation. This was a gridlock due to a mistake.

Let's call it a mistake. So conditions that we can't control that wildfire. It is what it is. And so we had at one point we had 40 cars in the queue, which means from the fire incident command post back to where we had the highway closure back into Glenwood Springs. We're able to close them by moving apparatus and personnel to the right shoulder, get those cars through. And then we had the entire highway available to us to start working a little more safe in the fire.

OK, great. Thank you for your answers. We'll start with Mayor Pro Temselinski.

Is it within our purview to initiate a change in traffic patterns to relieve congestion, say?

Not generally. In our city, certainly. Right. But the one that we're talking about in this particular one, I'd say probably not CDOT. We make requests like anything else that we deal with CDOT. Generally, they're very, very cooperative with us. The city manager declared this a local emergency. And so when we start rising to that level, they're pretty good about being responsive, provided they have the staff. That's not a simple undertaking. As you can imagine, it does take a little bit of time. But I think generally, we need to go through them and the state patrol.

And so say that we declare a state of emergency, we have like a horrible gridlock that is creating an unsafe condition within Glenwood Springs. How long estimated would that process take from the time that we initiated the request to when it could be instituted?

Are you talking about evacuation?

No, I'm talking about, you know, we have gridlock to the point where it's not safe in Glenwood. Emergencies can't, you know, say if somebody has a medical emergency, we can't get assistance to them. We need relief. We can't do it because of conditions on I-70. City manager says we have panic button pushed.

Sure.

Just give me ballpark.

Hard to say. 20 minutes, maybe, I guess 30, because they're dedicating the crews that they had to us at that fire, closing down points from the west, coming into Glenwood Springs, all those exits, South Canyon, out into Newcastle, coming into Glenwood Springs. They had those secured, the ones at the fire. And I don't know what they were pulling from Eagle County to shut down the .0. But I would guess 30 minutes if they had all their people in the right places.

Okay. Is there any sort of, because I think that that's a question that's in some people's minds is why some measure wasn't taken once that kind of bottleneck created to try and like relieve it more quickly? Is there...

I just think we're resource limited. I mean, we had three police officers working and several people said, well, I didn't see a cop. You're right, you didn't because there's only three of us, three actual police officers. The rest of us were doing these traffic controls and we can only control one at a time. And again, because it wasn't an evacuation order, we have a TIMS plan, but we're pulling then assets from A to move them to B. Then the west side of the valley here is not covered because then people are going to continue coming back. And so either we staff it there, we staff it on the east, you know, pay Peter to, you know, one of those kinds of things.

Yep. Oh, I appreciate your answers. Thank you.

I'm sorry. I don't have more definitive.

No, it's, I'm just trying to get answers to questions that I've heard that I'm like, wasn't clear on and I think might be in people's minds. And I'm just trying to kind of add a little bit more context to what y'all were dealing with.

Yes. Thank you. you know, I'd, I'd, uh, suggest that, you know, the fire department, the police department trained on these things fairly regular chief general has spent a significant amount of time at the fire department on this program with CDOT. And so we're going to have a follow-up through Matt Langhorst and his team with us fire department to talk about what that might look like moving forward to understand some of those gaps there. But again, the locate the topography and location that we're in are some very challenging. You certainly know that. And then, uh, mobilizing the resource, very limited resource we have is also a challenge. So we'll we're trained in it we do the very best we can certainly in that evacuation you'd see a different outlook i think and different approach thank you thank you counselor small so i had a couple of ideas while that was going on um

One was our calculations about water availability for fire. And this question and the next one both surround the idea that that fire was relatively small and not significant. But it could have been big. And it could have been two fires. and so i think all of our eqr calculations for fire storage assume one fire and if we if that turned into two fires i think we would have had a different situation um Had it turned into two fires and an evacuation became necessary, it would have been impossible. Traffic was traffic was already jammed. No evacuation plan would work. So it makes me think that really one of the most important things was communication and the communication was not great. When and not consistent. when we got the Garfield County notice that I-70 was open, it wasn't that only one lane was open, it was that I-70 was open. And so everybody's thinking, okay, let's go. And there was nowhere to go still for hours. So had the communication been immediate when that highway got closed, PB, John Gerstle, Somehow to everyone up valley in both directions, we might have stopped some of that traffic from becoming a parking lot.

PB, Harmon Zuckerman, There. Did you have a question.

PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Yes, how can we improve the communication lines that consistency in the timeliness of the communications PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Thank you for that. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Yeah, I would say that PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Sure.

Good evening, Council. Rob Pitt, your fire marshal. So one of the miscommunication breakdowns that happened last week during that fire was our crews and CDOT trying to manage that scene and trying to determine how long that closure was going to be. So with any incident that happens on the highway, when our crews respond out there, part of their protocol is to kind of think about what's going to happen, right? If this traffic accident or if there's a fire, how long is it going to be? And then try to communicate that with CDOT. With what happened last Tuesday, we were kind of on that brink between deciding, hey, is this going to be a long-term closure? As you guys know, long-term closures creates that northern detour. That northern detour is not a short detour. It opens up all throughout Mika through Craig. It takes quite a while for CDOT to get that up and running. And so what happened last week is we're kind of on that cusp. Right as we hit that three-hour mark, which is kind of the CDOT's threshold of now opening that northern detour, that's when they started opening. They started trying to get that traffic moving. But that's when we started mitigating that fire and saying, hey, we can probably get this highway open now and try and get people moving. And so that was one of the breakdowns that happened last week is We thought it was going to be a short fire, then it was kind of a long fire, and then it was back to like, hey, we can get it back open this evening, and we'll come back tomorrow and mitigate the rest of this fire. So I think that was one of the breakdowns that happened last week, is just remembering that northern detour. It takes some time to set up.

I hope that answers your question. But even if notice went out that I-70 was closed. We hope it's only going to be an hour or two, but we're not sure. If that could have stopped half of the traffic that jammed up into town here, it would have made a big difference.

Yeah. And then, again, coming back to resources, right? It's us with our limited resources, CDOS limited resources, and then it's dispatchers limited resources. Think about how many phone calls, you know, there were... dealing with in that period of time. We were dealing with other incidents here in town as well. And so it's a lot for the staffing and for us to review and try and get better for next time.

Thank you.

Well, I think the raise point, if the Garfield County emergency responses or messages would be a little more detailed, just one more line of what's actually going on, I think that could have helped. That's, I think, where he was getting at. And I agree with what he's trying to say. Do you have a question about the water?

I'm not prepared to answer. I'm not that professional. I'd be Matt Langhorst who's here to answer the questions.

You're good. OK. Any other questions? OK, we'll see none. Anybody from the public like to comment? I'm asking? Again, who might you be?

Lori, Chase. Thank you. And I had a thought, and I've been investigating what they did in Paradise, California, as an aftermath. But putting that aside, we do have those wonderful signs, as Joseph pointed out, up and down the highway. And I think that if we could have gotten CDOT to respond quicker and say, hey, this is what's going on in Glenwood. You might not make it home. Why don't you try taking Highway 133 to Paonia, Hotchkiss? You know, you know the story.

We do.

And it would have lessened a lot of traffic. And it would have avoided some people having to take the huge detour around, but that could only be accessible, you know, another area. But I thought, you know, everything that we can add to help mitigate these issues would be great.

Thank you, Laurie. Mayor Pro Temselinski, please. Oh, I'm sorry. Is there anybody else from the public that would like to come forward? Please state your name and whether you live in city limits or not, since we don't know who you are.

Yeah. Hi, everyone. My name is Kevin Brady. My wife and I live in town, and we have a business in town. And, you know, we have a... Our house just sits up just below Boy Scout. So fires are always our concern. But also, we get a real vantage point from up where we're at. I mean, we just saw this whole thing. And, you know, the one thing that we kind of paid attention to that I think a lot of the public pays attention to that could or should be considered to become wrapped up in all this communication that we're talking about is that I think it's called watch duty. And it's basically the fire alert app that everyone hears on their phone. It's kind of like the kidnap alert. Everything goes off. And so we paid a lot of attention to it. A lot of people we were in contact with were paying a lot of attention to it. And that seemed to be a really big dialogue on what to do for especially people that are in vehicles because they're completely out of contact. It's not like you're getting anything across the radio, which is kind of weird that we don't have that kind of system in place, especially within our Western Slope territory. But I would strongly suggest we try to talk to, and this naturally sounds like a more government issue or something, we really get kind of closer in contact with that app because I think that's nine out of 10 people, that's what we depended on. That's just a suggestion. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks, Kevin. All of it, it's just an update. Anybody else from the public? Okay, we'll see none. I'll close the public portion. I'll bring it back and we'll start with Mayor Pro Temselinski, please.

So I just had a couple of comments. You know, when all this started unfolding, I was returning from Grand Junction. So I made the decision. I had a meeting in Carbondale at 7.30. I was like, if I leave now, I'm going to be a little bit late, but I'm going to end up in Carbondale. So I did the whole Delta over 133. And as I was coming up, You know, it was, you know, pretty, pretty much traffic as usual. I got to Redstone. You could see the increase, you know, as I was coming over McClure Pass there. Quite a lot of people were taking that detour. I got, My meeting got canceled. I got to Glenwood 730. So it really didn't take hardly any time at all to get into Glenwood. My daughter left Mountain Paws, which is out in front of the rodeo grounds at regular commuter time. She got in. So it wasn't. The initial, like the highway was closed then. It was the reopening in my observation. That's where things went awry. So there is a lot to be learned from that. My poor daughter, I wasn't excited about her taking that 133 route back to Junction because she had to go to Junction that night. And so I encouraged her to wait till the highway opened and she left at 845 and returned home at 1 a.m. and never made it past the rec center. So it was, it was a mess and we all felt the impacts. You know, I think it's a mixed blessing when these things happen because it gives us an opportunity to learn and do better at a time that it isn't a crisis. And other than inconvenience, there isn't a high cost. So, you know, it may be a bit of a blessing in disguise. One other thing that, because I'm me, I talked to Jacob Zook, who's our kind of information guy. And I was just curious if there was any way to know how much of that traffic that was stuck in Glenwood Springs. I know a lot of locals, my daughter being one of them. I know a lot of people that couldn't get from one side of town to the other. So I know it was a lot of locals. But one thing that he pointed out to me that I thought was interesting was I think it was at 10.30 PM, there was 82% more non-residents in Glenwood Springs than typical. So that's people trying to get home. trying to get through town you never know right you don't know where they're going this is true people who don't live here trying to get somewhere else we can we can extrapolate that they were heading west because that's the direction they were going in so um you know anecdotally it might be that these are people trying to get home um there was some other data that he had about like behaviors people who came from aspen stayed in Glenwood, people that came from Basalt, went to Carbondale, you know, kind of just a little bit of a difference of mentality. But I think that we do have a lot of data and it's worth recognizing that, you know, in the growth conversations that we continue to have, we are not necessarily impacted by our Glenwood Springs growth. We are impacted by our regional growth. When the housing opportunities are to the west of us, that's where the growth happens, but they have to come through Glenwood. And so we don't get a say in that. All we can do is make decisions within our town that create the best possible circumstances for what we have to work with. And so I just ask that everybody keep that in mind as we continue to talk about these things. How do we work with our neighbors? How do we work with the county in having these conversations in a way that's thoughtful and encompasses all of these realities because we don't always get a seat at the table when the conversation is being had. So we have to establish those relationships and establish those shared values before the conversation happens. So these are all things that come through my mind as kind of looking back on this situation. I think, I don't know that there's anybody that lives in town that didn't feel the impacts, whether it was directly or just somebody they know. So, you know, more information to make better decisions down the road.

Thank you. Excellent point.

Councilor Schachter. Thank you. A couple things. Just like some things we heard earlier from public comments, sometimes things are intolerable and we may or may not have a course of action. This was an intolerable event that creates, I hope, a valuable learning experience. And I would hope that with our initiative chief or others that we don't let this pass, that we sit down with all our partners and say, okay, this was intolerable. It could have been way worse had it been an unexpected fire. What do we all need to do to prevent it? And I would encourage us as I look at this and what happened to perhaps take a and more aggressive, less conservative approaches is such a thing. Maybe we're better off to the extent CDOT will let us and our manager can react quick enough to say, emergency earlier maybe. And maybe it's not the great emergency we expect, but for the time being, maybe some people are convenience south of us and east of us and west of us a little, but we avoid the intolerable situation that happens. So I don't know how the debriefing happens, but I hope we're not done debriefing this and talking to our partners about an intolerable situation. And like Aaron said, this makes me think about even further valley-wide and city housing policies. It makes me question why I would ever approve, for example, going forward, any workforce housing for any community up valley, because all I'm doing is compounding the problem. So it's a complicated thing, but I hope we debrief way deeper perhaps than we have tonight. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Any more comments? Okay, I'll see none. Thank you guys for responding. Thanks G for being here. I received information about the plans as we were talking here. And you guys can find the evacuation plan on gwsco.info forward slash be prepared. And if you can't get through to that or through that address, then it's on our homepage on the scrolling banner on the top. So anybody that's interested in the evacuation plan or the traffic management plan, it can be found on our website. So please, Chief.

Thank you, Mr. Schachter. Thank you for that. So we do have an after-action review internally and a little bit more broader with, like I mentioned earlier, with our CDOT partners. That's pending because the firemen work different schedules and so getting everybody in the same room. But that absolutely is on the table with our communications team, county communications team. And lastly, and I should have started off with this, is that... I don't think I need to even reiterate how grateful we are for the professional work that our firefighters did in containing that fire very, very rapidly. People have thrown a lot of rocks, and understandably so. They're frustrated, and I get that. But on the flip side of that, it's rare that we hear, you know, what a great job our professional firefighters did, not just in Glenwood, but our partners to the west of us. So we're very grateful for that, and I'm sure I speak for all of you when we talk like that. So thank you for your continued support of our team.

Thank you. Thank you, Chief. All right. Yeah, absolutely. Great update. Thank you. Good discussion. We always learn. Well, we should learn from everything. So, okay. It is 8 o'clock. Should we take a quick recess, guys? Okay, five-minute, five, seven-minute recess. We'll reconvene by that.

Do you understand that? It's about insufficiency there. Yeah. Thank you.

Well, if you order the second half of tonight's meeting, this is still June 18th, and it's still regular city council meeting. Excellent. After the fire update, we're going to get another update, and that is from the Glenwood Springs Riverside Botanical Garden. And the ladies are here, and I understand you probably have a presentation, so you've got to hook up technology. So we're going to wait a second until you're ready. Okay.

You know it. You know it.

Yeah, we did. We did. We did get it in our packet. That's correct.

It's not in the packet, but it was an email.

Oh, it was an email. Okay. Later on.

It came in this hour.

Thank you.

Bye.

While they do this, I'll get it in.

Oh, wait.

No, he's just here.

Okay.

Okay.

So I'm Laura Speck. I'm the director of the Glenwood Springs Riverside Botanical Garden. And we're here to give you some excellent updates on where we've been out these past few months. So as of today, June 18, 2026, we have received over 200 donations from generous local citizens and organizations in our community amounting to $95,000. That leaves us just $5,000 away from our phase one fundraising goal of $100,000 in less than six months. A few of our top financial supporters are SGM, who has donated over 70 hours of work time equaling $7,538. The Glenwood Springs Hot Springs Pool, which has donated $7,000. Alpine Bank has given us $3,000, plus almost $2,000 in promotional advertisements still to come. April and Steve Carver have given us $3,000. The Roaring Fork Rotary Club, $3,500. The Gerbas family, $2,500. The Dahl family, $10,500. An anonymous donation of $35,000. So we are beyond grateful to all of these and every donation from $5 to $500. This is an epic accomplishment and something we are so proud to share with you tonight. We have given over 18 personal slideshow presentations with several more on our calendar for the summer ahead. We have had over 7,300 site visits to our website in which we continue to update almost daily. At our two Tea Party fundraising events, we raised about $5,000 at each one of those events. And we were encouraged by city council members to have a hand sign and an online petition. And as of today, we have over 700 signatures. And we'll hopefully be getting even more at Strawberry Days weekend. So we're very excited to tell you what we've been up to. And Caroline's going to give a, the two Carolines are going to give a presentation.

Awesome. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you very much. I'm Carolyn Meadowcroft. I live in Global Springs outside the city limits. And I'm Carolyn Zipperly. I live on Blake Avenue. What we're doing tonight is just giving you an update. We're not here as a formal presentation. That's why nothing was in your packets. We're not here asking for anything or you don't need to vote on anything. We just want to keep you in the loop about what we are doing. As Laura said, we feel we've made some amazing progress in a short period of time. And we just wanted you to know where we are. We kind of want to remind you what we're doing. You've seen some of these slides before, they've been out there, or maybe you might have attended one of our presentations at, you know, a group in town. But we are here to try to, we have a vision of a destination that will enrich the history, sustainable practices in our Glamis Springs community. And what we're looking at is we want to build a botanical garden on a riverside lot within Glenwood Springs. It would be city-owned property that we as a nonprofit would build and manage a garden. One of our main objectives is to preserve the historic greenhouse located in West Glenwood. Along with that, we're going to be able to create educational and cultural programming, environmental stewardship, tourism, we feel is a big issue and a big factor in what we are looking at doing. And ultimately, we're going to be building a long-term community asset and economic driver for Goma Springs and the entire valley. We have a three-phase goal, and frankly, we'll probably have those phases kind of spread out or identified a little bit more in-depth as we go along. First phase is to establish our nonprofit organization, which was done officially last August. launched some marketing, some fundraising campaigns, get information out there, let people know what we were doing, help us in this endeavor. We're looking at securing land as a lease with the city. Um, we needed to develop our engineering construction site plans. We're working on all that. We've, we've come a long way. We'll talk about that a little bit more. And then ultimately this would all lead to dismantling and moving the greenhouse, um, by the end of the year. So we feel like we've kept the public well informed. Um, we've got city partnership that we're working on to put in place ideally, you know, by the end of this year and then have that greenhouse securely moved. Phases that will come along, next phase would be actually working on rebuilding the greenhouse foundation, designing, finalizing garden plans, getting some of our programs in place, actually maybe even begin some small scale events. And in that phase, which we're looking at two to three years out, the garden would be established and these partnerships would be in place and generating income. And then phase three is, you know, the big picture, looking at what can be done. How can we grow? What else can we provide as a... economic factor to our community. At that point, we are obviously going to need to be hiring some staff, seasonal staff, executive director, really enhance what we're doing and expand the process, the income generating factors of the garden. This is when it becomes self sustainable through the earned income and continuing funding sources. What we've got here is just some general things. We're not going to speak on all these. This was me late at night last night putting in some bullet points to kind of think about what we have done, what questions have we dealt with, have we asked ourselves, have we been asked by members of the community, and what kind of answers we have started putting together for these questions. I think Carolyn here would like to talk just briefly about the the greenhouse just to kind of refresh your memory about what we have and what we've learned as we've gone along.

Yes, thanks for that we have been able to determine that this is actually a Lord and Burnham greenhouse that's a well known manufacturer from Irvington New York did a lot of. Gilded Age greenhouses for really notable private owners as well as botanical gardens that are well known around the nation. The Redstone Castle is where the original greenhouse sat and you can see there in the top picture. And that was Osgoods Museum, or Osgoods Conservatory, where they would bring plants from around the world. Now, we've gone through this a lot, but the condition of the structure is decent. SGM has done a survey, mapped out all the bolts, and given us a dismantling plan for that. And as you know, we plan to replace the glass and reuse the stone from the chimney, and the stone from the foundations will be cut down and applied as a veneer. We are now conversing with contractors about the actual dismantling process, scaffolds, cranes, things like that, and then anticipating the amount of land that we will need to store on city property as we move forward into developing the construction budget, designing a geothermal system, working with CMC and some other local energy consultants to help make this a really model sustainable project. So we know that the Glenwood Gardens has closed and is going to be redeveloped into housing. One of the things that was asked at the Planning and Zoning Commission when I served Well, the business has closed. The property has not been closed upon yet. But one of the things that had happened was at that planning and zoning meeting, the question came from the public, what's going to happen to the historic greenhouse? So that gave us the idea to relocate it to city property. And over the last nine months, we've been really working hard towards that, trying to involve other city entities, other nonprofits, and other community groups in our process.

The next item or phase or I guess Part of this whole process is the botanical gardens. Where would it be? How would it be located? The design of the gardens, the location. We have looked at various different things. We have actually looked at alternative locations of property that is owned by the city of Glenwood and analyzed various different places it could go. We feel that the confluence area is the most beneficial for the garden for the proximity of the greenhouse and the location to downtown. That would be more of a income generator because of people being able to visit within walking distance. We've explored different advantages, disadvantages of locations. parking, access, in this case, that location would be entry through a tunnel, how we would lay out garden beds, put in pathways, and where would the fencing be, gating? And one of the main things we've looked at has been access to the river. And then how could this be enjoyed year round? What we have been working on is a garden plan that would be utilizing we kind of hope sort of a Victorian type of a garden around the greenhouse. But then we'd be looking at natural plants, riparian area, pollinating plants. So we'd be looking at a lot of different options there that would best work with the kind of landscape and the water restrictions, the climate that we have here in our area. What we have kind of determined is that the garden beds and the processes will be evolving. It is something that never stands still. You don't just build it and it stays there, you know, unlike a city park where you've got your playground right here and that's where it's always going to be. With a botanical garden, there's a lot that can change and move and evolve as time goes on and things grow and change. We'd be looking at with the location of the greenhouse and where it would be placed. We figure roughly 25% of a space that we'd be looking at would be designated for the location of the greenhouse and the amenities that would be around that. And then 75% would be garden and open space. As mentioned, we're looking to CMC for a great partnership to help us with the sustainability. This could be a great learning experience for them and a wonderful resource for us. This is just kind of a little bit of an idea of the site plan. This is information that we will be putting into our P&Z submission. If you'd like to talk a little bit about that. Yes, I would.

So one of the concerns that has come up is access for the public to get to the river. Obviously, we're calling ourselves Riverside Botanical Garden, so we sure want to celebrate that connection to the river. And I'd like to point out in the drawings that when you come through the tunnel that exists under the railroad grade, even when the gardens are closed, you'll have an option to go either way around to access to Rivers Park or the 7th or 8th Street Bridge. So we will not be closing off access to the Riverside Path at any time. Now we do plan on having several gates that come into the property that will be open during the day. We're still trying to figure out what kind of, if we always charge an admission, will there be a membership? If there is an admission, there will certainly be many free days to allow community members to come through the gardens. But we wanna make sure that this project does not block off the river from the community. That's really important to us as well as some other voices we've heard. As of now, the Riverside Path has a fence at the edge of this property that the city has recently installed, and it is a very transparent black metal fence. It's six feet high and serves to keep vandals and other troublesome elements out of the currently fenced area, which, as you know, is largely undeveloped, mostly weeds and some storage. So we would love to have more of a connection to the river, but it is also really important that all of the work that we do to relocate the greenhouse and establish the gardens is not just open for vandals to attack overnight, trample, as we've seen sometimes happen on Sixth Street and other areas of town. So those are two comments that we've had that we're working really hard to collaborate with our partners on.

We've been working on a budget that includes a lot of like kind donations, a lot of volunteer work. We have much more extensive budget for the gardens and going forward. At this point, we're just giving you a quick overview there of the budget that we had established for the dismantling and the relocation of the greenhouse structure and the stone and it came up to be roughly a total of about 81,000 knowing there's always a big contingency that you should plan for we had a goal of 100,000 and as you saw we are very close to that goal we've had amazing support from people that have stepped up and you know donated money to us We are working on other funding sources for the future phases. You know, we feel like we've been able to manage a lot and can get the first phase done with what we've already accumulated. But we know that you can't stop there. We have to be prepared. You don't just wait for phase one to be done before you start phase two. You've got to be halfway down the road in that next phase. space to be able to be prepared for when you're ready to start. So we've already been working on some other things, writing some grants and looking at different options for generating income. We've explored a lot of what goes on in other Other local botanical gardens Montrose and steamboat springs, for instance, we were asked. As an example, what is an operating budget for a place like steamboat springs, it is very close to what we do, and they were very kind they had provided us with their financial information and their their budget was about 461,000. for 2025. So that's, you know, seems like that's a good pattern that we could follow and a reasonable comparison, their garden is located on city owned land and I believe they have one employee. And so it they have different fundraising sources that that we are looking into and have copied in some cases. So we feel that that is, you know, it's doable for them. It's doable for us, our location, if it is in the confluence that that we are hoping it to be would be a much better location. This is within walking distance for you know, everyone that comes to town. So we do feel that there's a lot of opportunity there for us to be able to make this self-sustaining. We do recognize that there are various different opinions and different feelings about locations, about the greenhouse, about what's being built, how we're going about it. We are trying to be very innovative in the structure, in the foundation, in dealing with issues like flood zones and maybe not the best soil conditions. So we're looking at all of those different factors to make sure that we are as prepared as possible. We're always open to suggestions, collaborations. As mentioned, we've been giving a lot of different presentations to organizations. We met with the DDA just on Tuesday. And we'd love to work together to collaborate on the best direction to go, how to make this a beautiful, sustainable garden and preserve a historic greenhouse for our community and the entire Valley. Okay, just the basic information there. Okay, do you have any questions?

Okay, excellent. Thank you. Thank you for being here. This was leaps and bounds from last time we saw you. This was great. So Mayor Pro Tem Salinsky, please.

I just have one question. You mentioned that you considered other locations. Can you tell me what other locations you looked at and why those were rejected?

Do you want to? Yeah, she did a lot.

Yeah, I went through the assessor's website, identified city-owned properties, sort of weeded some out if they were too small. We identified five or six properties that would be adequate, one of them being Veltus Park, which of course is already a well-loved local park, but it's the right size. It's on the river. It is a little bit farther from town, and it doesn't have the available adjacent parking lot. So obviously we're not going to get rid of Veltus Park. I actually looked at the 6th Street Landing, but turns out that's owned by the Hot Springs Cool and not by the city, though we just were made aware. We saw some really nice restrooms there. The only viable spot out of my analysis would be riverside where the old polo grounds were behind the high school now vehicular access to that property is troublesome uh it is not already someplace where you would grab your lunch in town and go to eat it um there's already vandals and vagrants known to be living in the in the woods there behind the high school um the high school itself might open up the greenhouse to potential vandalism um And then of course, to get access down there for events, catering and equipment, there would have to be road infrastructure made that is not currently in existence other than where they dump the snow. So I think that we would personally, I would not like to see that area developed as a greenhouse with a park and facilities like this. I think it way more belongs at the confluence site.

So say just devil's advocate. I'm thinking about Steamboat Springs and I just was there last weekend. So it's like in the front of my mind. And I've been there several years ago. It has evolved and changed really beautifully over those, you know, probably six or seven years. it's not located near their downtown um it started with some pretty unimproved land and and through their phases so you know if for some reason do you believe your plans could be modified to accommodate a different location if for some reason we are like the city decided that you know the current spot that you're looking at is not optimal

Will that be a board decision? I mean, yes is the answer, but.

Laura.

Yep. I mean, yes would be the answer. I mean, we're so passionate about bringing this project to our community to leave a legacy for, you know, this is an opportunity that all of you on city council and people within our community that we can all be like, you know, we can be a part of this. We can be really proud of ourselves for bringing something that's very positive to our community in a time where a lot of this growth in our community is really difficult for people like me that were born and raised here. You know, it's hard to see some of the change that's happening. So we look at this, the overall project as, you know, something that, Again, we just really want to see happen. So we're very open to trying to have dialogue. That's why we're having these proactive conversations with all these social organizations and different groups. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

A comment that I have is that I do agree. Steamboat is not close by. In my opinion, it's down by the river, but it's really not a good location. It doesn't tie into the community like this location for Glenwood Springs could. We want our community to be more walkable and bikeable and rather than people getting in a car and they're down here staying at the hotel and they see oh there's a a garden but but you know it's clear across town um are they going to go there are they going to get in their car drive across town um you know park somewhere to walk within the garden. They may or may not do that. So if you're looking at what could be the best economic driver, the best tying in with the rest of the tourist destination that we have, you want to look at where is the best location that will give the most impact and will have the best benefit to the community in general.

Okay, thank you. Council Schachter.

Couple quick questions, not discouragement for questions. Do you have a contingent plan should Glenwood Garden sale not go through?

We have a very good relationship with McPherson's, the current owner. Frankly, the contingency plan would be to contact them about obtaining the greenhouse. It is not really in the kind of shape that would be a commercial endeavor any longer. I'm speaking for them and I hope that I'm not speaking out of turn, but I do not anticipate that they're selling that property for someone to use that greenhouse. There's no value left in that. There is, however, the historical value. Well, who's going to buy a historical greenhouse You know, that's not a... You are. We are. We would not buy. We would not buy it. We would approach them about donating that to us and we would continue with the plan as is, but we would be obtaining it from that family as opposed to the developer.

And at this point, do you have a rough goal? I assume in... maybe millions for phases two and three. Have you projected out that far what you need in hand to make this successful?

We have done some projections, yes. We don't have everything fine-tuned. As you can well understand, a big part of that entire picture and figuring out a budget is where is this going to be? So, yes, there's going to be certain things that you're, you know, you're going to have no matter where you are located, but a big part of what can and will be done is the location. That kind of falls through to the income generating piece as well.

Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Okay, I'll see none. Thank you, ladies, for being here. Thanks for the update. Very informative. You guys, like I said, you've come a long way. Anybody from the public like to comment?

Hi, everyone. I'm Jillian Sutherland, the director of the Glenwood Springs Downtown Development Authority. The Downtown Development Authority Board has asked that I share a memorandum that was submitted to council today and requested that I read it for the record just so that it could be shared with the public. But I timed myself. It takes me three minutes and 40 seconds. If I read it really fast. So I can either do that or I can hand these to you in person and kind of shorten it.

Yeah, let's hand it. I think we all received it in email though. Yeah.

Oh yeah, they didn't get any.

I gave them one.

OK. So do you want me to read it or no? Just summarize and give a quick.

I think we all read it.

OK. Sounds great. Thank you. So the DDA board got a chance to meet with the Riverside Botanical Gardens group on June 16. And at our meeting on May 19, I gave the board a presentation on the planning history of this confluence area. Following those two meetings, the DDA board called a special meeting. this morning, wow, that's a long time ago, feels like, to talk about whether or not they support the proposed location at the confluence area and unanimously decided, we had six out of our eight board members, that they do not support a botanical garden being located on the four acre wastewater treatment plant site. This recommendation is based on decades of planning that has been done. Planning for this area has started in 1999. This wastewater treatment plant, removing it from that area, was the largest public investment that the city of Glenwood Springs has ever undertaken to the tune of $30 million. And since then, the city has been moving over the decades, acquiring property and easements to move this comprehensive vision forward to connect downtown to the river. This is our only opportunity to meaningfully connect downtown Glenwood Springs to the river. The botanical gardens, while we see the strong merit and have great and deep respect for our friends and neighbors that have worked on this, we feel this location is just such a golden goose for our community to really improve river access and build a riverfront park where people can touch and feel the river and make that connection to downtown. The plan as envisioned with the fencing and with having to pay in order to access and come and enjoy, we feel is in direct conflict with the past planning efforts for this area. And so the DDA is recommending that this is not the right location The board is also very concerned about the long-term financial sustainability of this as proposed and is concerned that perhaps an unfinished project may lay on city staff's shoulders and an already strained parks department budget if it is not seen through to fruition.

Okay, thank you. Anybody else from the public? You know the drill.

I do. I've been here before. I'm Charlie Wellman. I've been a resident for 50 years, and I'm the chairman of the Downtown Development Authority. The Downtown Development Authority really feels like this is what is in our geographic and our planning area. We think the confluence is very important to the long-term vitality of the city and to the economic the ability of the citizens of the Glenwood Springs to access the river in a meaningful way. One of the slides that was shared was a metal fence. That metal fence would go along the river path. It would basically mean that this property is only available for use by the people who are in the botanical gardens. When they presented to us earlier this week, they talked about an annual budget of somewhere in there 400 to $600,000. And they talked about today about that's gonna be done through programs, admission costs and things like that. You all know what it costs to run the community center. $400,000 a year is gonna be very difficult to raise through the methods they're talking about. You have to be very concerned that this will become an economic liability for the city in our view. We are prepared, our current strategic plan is to move forward with Cooper as our next major project. We've had significant discussions as this has come up and we've revisited the various confluence plans that have been done since the early 19, 2009 and earlier, around 2000 on. And we believe that there's a better way of doing this. We're prepared to lead a discussion of that, to realign our, we haven't made this vote yet, so I can't speak for the board doing this, but to realign our priorities and to put it into this area to see if we could develop a better area, better with access to the entire city of Glenwood Springs. I'd like to work with the Botanical Group and the City Council, your Parks Department, to see if there's a way to make a good access to the community, to make this a community asset and not an asset limited to the people who would really want to go to the Botanical Gardens. We don't want to limit it to that. We want to make it available to the entire public. So I would encourage you to Not lease the property. I know they haven't asked for that yet, but not to lease the property, not to commit to doing that until we have a better chance to look at this and work with those various partners to see what the best plan is. And when I first got in council, I'll be real quick. I know I'm running out of time, but when I first got in council, we looked at, through the Brownfield study, an area play area. And it was an area where young people, you know, under five and six could be, you know, be in... What am I looking for? They could be along the river and be active in the river because they could make that as such that they could have access to it and use it. Obviously not in high water, but in other times. We think that's as important to the city as a botanical garden. So we'd ask you to keep that in mind as you move forward. Thank you.

All right. Thanks, Charlie. Okay. Anybody else here? Please come forward.

Yeah, my name is Kevin Brady. I'm with the city. I'm on the DDA. Part of the reason this has come up now is because I've been in a situation as a business owner that I had to have plans for my funds well in advance. And once we heard that they want to go ahead and be able to purchase or move and dismantle and move the property within the end of the year, it seemed that DDA needed to go ahead and move forward with a more immediate response to that, just simply to prevent The fact that if you do move it or you can't move it, you've already invested a lot of time and money moving it to that place. But in fact, that may not be the case. So that's the reason we're stepping forward with this as well. I just wanted to bring that up. Thank you.

Okay, excellent. Thank you. Thanks for your input. Anybody else from the public? You see none. Thank you. Back to Council. Any more questions or comments? We'll start with Councillor Smith.

Thank you. Just to do Mr. Brady's observation, can I just clarify the concept of acquiring, dismantling and moving relocation? But your plan to do whatever you're planning to do by the end of the year, where would it end up?

City Council has committed that there will be city property in order to store the dismantled greenhouse while we are working on finalizing a permanent location. This was in a meeting probably about six months ago.

So it could be somewhere else other than the confluence, which is in discussion.

Yes, and they have asked us to estimate the size of storage that we would need.

Thank you. Any other questions, comments? okay we'll see none well uh thank you all for being here um i truly hope the discussion continues um i personally think a four acre park in the riverside is enormous and uh huge to maintain different aspects of it could help that, such as a garden or commercial endeavors. But anyway, like I said, get together, start talking, figure out the best way to move forward. We do want the connection to the river, but we would also, I would love to see flowers and trees and whatever else there is. So with that, again, thank you all for being here and we'll move on to the next item. So thank you. item nine tonight's agenda ordinance 2026 11 and ordinance of the city of Glenwood Springs Colorado amending section 080-030-030-080-040-060 and 100-010-100 of the Glenwood Springs Municipal Code regarding enforcement by a neighborhood service specialist. I don't even know what that is, but it sounds great.

So Matt can talk about what the neighborhood service specialist is. This is really just a very limited expansion of that role to allow for some additional enforcement personnel on some things like water and trash and utility related things. So very narrowly tailored something public works that that person is actually housed in But something that working with the PD they're comfortable with with this kind of narrow role outside of what normal code enforcement would do and it just kind of expands on the capability to deal with a few situations and with that, Matt can explain exactly what those are.

So our neighborhood service specialist does live in ComDev. Water, wastewater does pay for, I believe a portion of her currently salary. What Lynn does for us is she goes out and does all of our fog regulations, our fats, oils, and greases to make sure people are cleaning traps. If there's any issues, we notice them. It'd be nice to be able to find them instead of having to have a code enforcement come with and write the tickets and those kinds of things. Most of the time, that's not a problem, to be honest with you, but it would be nice to have that ability. When it comes to water, we do have a watering schedule and we only have one code enforcement person at this moment. So we go out and when wastewater people see somebody watering, they'll hang a door tag saying, hey, by the way, you shouldn't be watering right now. They'll take the tear off the bottom of it, write a note. If it happens again, then instead of Sandra or code enforcement have to go out, Lynn would be able to go out. The last one is bear interactions with the trash. They're common, unfortunately, this year. And we'd like to have her have the ability to write those tickets or make that initiation also. So it's three small little things. We're not asking for all the things that code enforcement were doing. But this is kind of what we had intended for Lynn to be doing this whole entire time. We've just never really gotten there with the courts and PD. And they all seem to be pretty meshed up at this point. So we would like to be able to expand this. Matt Pinyan, Lynn used to be a code enforcement officer so she kind of knows how everything goes if if, when she retires hopefully never. Matt Pinyan, We would have to retrain somebody with all of these specifics take a little longer, but it's something we are capable of doing so that's why we're asking for this is just a little bit more manpower to just get the word out there.

Dave Kuntz, Okay, thank you matt any questions. Dave Kuntz, Council rhyme generally.

What does it take for what authority needs to be granted to a person to be able to enforce city regulations?

We talking it through with what the judge would like to see when we're operating outside of the public safety realm, which is where code enforcement lives right now. He just wanted to see that there was something in the code that authorized that person to take or write that ticket. And so that's really why we're being very specific about both the title and then where in the code it lives with regard to those three specific areas.

So we don't need. person doesn't need to be a police man. It's someone who is in the role, trained to some level.

and that you have granted that authority. Yeah, and they're, it's just they're identified as who they are. And this is more, think of it more in almost an administrative penalty that you're receiving. It's not, this isn't like prosecuting a major crime. But so that's really, it's in this very- From authority to even- David Ensign, Put a tag tag on we're not right is is really that ability to write a ticket that has a fine that goes to the Court, the Court wants to see that they you as the City Council through the code have granted them the authority to do that okay.

Could we grant ourselves the same authority?

Citizens arrest.

Yes, but no.

OK, any other questions to Matt? OK, I'll see none. Thank you, Matt. Anybody from the public comment on this ordinance? I see none. Bring it back to council for a motion. Mayor Pro Tem Solinsky, please.

I move to approve Ordinance 2026-11, which is an ordinance of the City of Loma Springs, Colorado, amending Section 080303030, 0804060, and 100010100 of the Loma Springs Municipal Code regarding enforcement by the Neighborhood Services Specialist.

Thank you. Councilor Schachter, for a second, I assume? Second on motion for approval. Good. Motion and second. Any discussion? Mayor Plotin? Yes.

I wanted to talk a little bit about, since we talked about the watering schedule in this ordinance, I've seen a lot of comments recently about our water and the fact that we are restricting water. And I wanted to reiterate that the watering schedule is not a restriction of water. It is efficient and responsible use of our natural resources, we are trying to keep our we have plenty of water was we've been told for today's uses. But rather than just like consume all we have available to us, this is. City of Blooming Springs being proactive in putting in measures in place to make sure that the majority of that water stays in the natural environment, our rivers, our aquifers, our reservoirs, rather than in our lawns and wastewater treatment plants. So I just wanted to just mention that.

Okay, thank you. Councilor Townsend.

So I've known Lynn for 30 years plus years and having her in charge of something like this, I would feel really comfortable with that. If Lynn retired and you put somebody, I guess my concern is that, We're not going to just go around. Some of our code enforcement officers over the years have been maybe less than Lynn as far as customer service skills. Just kind of put that bluntly out there. And I wouldn't want to go out and just go, okay, we've got somebody driving around. It's like, give them a ticket. Give them a ticket. I hope we would take this and use it in such that, okay, if we got a person that's just blatantly disregarding this all the time, then yeah. But if we see somebody out there and they We've got a sprinkler. I hope we would at least ask them first, hey, do you know? Oh, yeah, it's the wrong day. Sorry about that. You know, a commercial, if GMA is running their water and it's running all down the street and it's been going on for six days, I'd say take the heck out of them right off the bat. But I would hope, you know, and I've heard stuff from other people too, you know, whether it was snow plow, blowing snow on the roads and whatnot, where people have been approached by code enforcement and it was, you know, I can give you a ticket for that. I can, you know, not really a... what i would say good customer service skills so i i would probably vote for this and support it but i'm nervous and i hope it would be managed such that we know what the intent of what we're doing is versus you know taking a look at how come across to the public as well

I think that Lynn is very good at discretion. She's very good at that. And I think that would be the intent to moving forward. And I've heard things about code enforcement also, but I also know some of the people that are coming from, and I'm like, yeah, you know, it's probably somewhere in the middle. a truth on this story. So, but I would say that this will be used as discussion and it's there to help code enforcement because they don't need code enforcement ticketing every person that's running water. I need them going to do the bigger things, which would free Sandra up at this moment and the next code enforcement person beyond that. These are kind of the minutia and would like to be able to use this person to kind of handle those a little bit more thoroughly, quickly, quickly. So I would agree 100%.

Okay, thank you. Councillor Small.

Yeah, it's a sensitive thing and it can cause a great deal of discontent and confusion. So the selection of that person is really important that they understand that they're a city employee. That means they work for the city. That means they work for the citizens.

I think we all agree with what you're saying.

Okay, any other questions? Lynn and I know each other very well, too. You know, it happens to all of us. So it's all good. With that, anybody from the public? Like the comment on ordinance 2026 11? I see none. Wait, didn't we already do that? Yeah, we already did that. Call for the question.

It passes 7-0.

All right, excellent. Thank you, Ryan. Thanks, Matt. Okay, here comes the one I forgot. And since we're in the middle of the meeting, I think I'd like to ask for continuance on item 10, resolution 2026-14, adoption of updated engineering standards 272. No, we can't do it. Mayor Pro Tem Silenci, please.

I move to continue resolution 2026-14, which is the adoption of updated engineering standards.

Thank you. And then second. Anybody? Councilor Townsley, a second. Excellent. Thank you. Any discussion? I think we know why, right? I know why we're continuing it, or do we need to give direction?

If the rest of the staff does, that's great. It wasn't my item, so I have no idea.

I think maybe it's Councilor Small. There you go. I know. I thought I clicked him.

There you go. I can't see behind Carl. Is that Ryan back there? It's not done. What was submitted on the transportation section still has edits in the title page and has no cover page. So, at least, at least that and then if if Council doesn't feel like there's any discussion involved in that then it's probably ready to go but it's still an incomplete document.

Okay, I guess that was the direction we were looking for. So, thank you. The motion is to continue so I'm calling for the question.

It passes unanimously.

Thank you, Ryan. Time is 5 to 9, and we're moving into item 11, resolution 2026-11, right-of-way acquisition for Southbridge.

Evening, Council. That pretty much sums it up. So in the larger scope of the South Bridge project, and we've had a lot of conversations about this, this is one of those just necessary steps along the way, at least from your legal team's perspective. In terms of finalizing right-of-way resolution, authorizing that acquisition, if necessary, by eminent domain. I know there's been a lot of discussion around that. You got a letter from AVLT in the packet, and I'm going to talk about Councilor Smith's non-conflict related to this as well. From the standpoint of what you see attached to this resolution is the entire right-of-way plan contained within that and the list of potential properties and temporary easements. One of those was Counselor Smith. Some time ago, he signed that temporary easement. And so from our perspective, from a legal conflict standpoint, he's not subject to what this would need to be used for. So from my standpoint, at least, I'm comfortable with him voting on this resolution because he has there's no action in what you're doing that directly affects him at this point um so from that standpoint um like i said we we don't view it i don't view it as a as a conflict and if council wants to talk about that we can but i just i just don't see it as an issue since the paperwork is done and has been done for months on end so With regard to the resolution itself, this is a lot of recitals and a lot of boilerplate. And this was drafted in conjunction with our condemnation council. just for the public's benefit, kind of what that process looks like if you have to utilize it. There is under state law, a series of steps that you have to walk through in terms of acquiring property from a private property owner, including appraisals and trading those appraisals and paying for them to get their own appraisal and going through a negotiation process And if you get to the point where as a public entity, you cannot find a negotiated solution, state statute does give and the constitution gives you the authority to take that property for fair market value. There's really two steps to that. The first is actually kind of three steps. The first is the passage of a resolution authorizing that particular use in the particular case as we are here tonight. If it were necessary to use it, then the next step is you would file suit to condemn that piece of property, whatever it is, it could be a temporary easement, an easement property and fee, and that goes on an expedited track to district court. The first step in that, it would be to obtain an order of immediate possession which means that if you can prove the statutory requirements, public necessity being the biggest one, the court will order possession to be vested in the public entity. And then the question of value is tried separately and at a later date, and that can be determined either trial to a jury, a trial to a board of commissioners, which are property owners from the community or to the judge so that that would be talking about value but possession is determined at that first hearing if it does go to hearing and quite often you will see stipulations for immediate possession because really the issue between the property owner and the entity more often than not is value it's not actually the property itself So anyway, with regards to the Southbridge project, we are now at the point, if we're going to hit the timelines that are necessary to have funds fully obligated and our target to have this out to bid in September to November, somewhere in that time range, that we need to adopt this resolution and move forward. We have... PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Two or three properties that were property interests and might be subject to this, the Holy Cross property, the Jackson property and then as a BLT said they have PB, Harmon Zuckerman, A conservation easement across the Jackson property which they're making some assertions regarding as well. Those would be determined in the court proceeding if we move forward I think fully across we're gonna come to a conclusion on without without needing to go to court AVLT has taken the position, but the only way To transfer that property is through condemnation. So it is not a Choice that the city makes lightly or that we would want to do but AVLT has taken the position That is the only way That that's going to happen So that means that there's not going to be a negotiated solution. We're going to have to go to court over here. So I would vastly prefer a different outcome, but that's where we're at.

Okay, thank you.

I'm happy to answer any questions. And otherwise, we're just looking for a motion to approve if you guys want to move forward with the project.

Okay, sounds good. Questions from council to staff. We'll start with Councilor Smith.

Not so much a question, but just to... Regarding my situation in this particular process, I want to thank the city attorney for clarifying what appears to not be a conflict, but just to reinforce it. I'd like to note for the record, for anybody who follows it, that in our case, the request is for a temporary construction easement for 501 square feet. of land adjacent to Airport Road. Our household has, as city attorney explained, filed paperwork in response to that request, including our own note that we will not accept any financial compensation if that easement goes through. So I hope that helps reinforce that it's OK for me to participate in this discussion. Thank you.

Hey, thank you, Council towns.

Two things. One, Councilor Smith is always one thinking everybody else for stuff. So I'd just like to say thanks for one putting yourself out there and going, you know, do I need to step back from this being very sensitive to to your position up here and also being on that easement. So thanks for I think handling that very above board and very well. The question I've got is, and this may be something that's confidential and can't be answered, and I'm happy with that too, but could you tell us what our value is versus the Jackson value and what that range is?

I wish I could off the top of my head and I can get it for you. I think we are preparing a final offer that will probably be reflective of their value. That's the last step after this resolution that we need to do. But I can't. So we're not millions of dollars apart. No, it's not. It's not. It's a few, two or 300,000 apart for that parcel. It is not millions of dollars. So I think that's why we feel like their appraisal was well within a margin of error that we were comfortable with. Like I said, I just don't have the number off the top of my head. Okay, that was my question.

Thank you. Councilor Schmoll.

Do we expect any other properties besides the Jackson property that will have to go through the condemnation process?

We don't. I think we're pretty much there on every other piece of property. And Steve and the team have been working with Holy Cross very closely on resolving those issues.

None of it on Airport Road?

No, none that we, I think there were a couple of minor design changes just to avoid having to deal with something. Most of them are temporary easements out on airport road, frankly, for grading to match driveways up to the new grade.

I didn't figure out what the code was.

Yeah, I don't do the engineering part. I do the cover sheet part.

Okay, Councilwoman. Would you talk a bit about AVLT's letter?

Sure. ADLT is a certain position that they have in several court cases that they have lost regarding trying to, the theory is that a conservation easement, because there are tax credits involved, becomes public property for which you can't condemn an easement. How we've seen that used by ADLT or by this attorney on behalf of other land trusts is really as a negotiating tactic and to get a little bit more money. But the reality is that one of the reasons we selected condemnation counsel that we did is he has tried a couple of cases against this attorney and won them with regard to this particular issue. Trying to equate a conservation easement, and I think you see in the letter, they try to equate state lands as being the same thing as a conservation easement with tax credits. And frankly, the statute calls this situation out that it doesn't qualify as public, that it is condemnable in the statute related to it. So it... it just is what it is but we're pretty comfortable in the state of the law in colorado on that issue good okay uh counselor smith thank you

In previous presentations and discussions, a combination of legal staff and engineering staff have described the importance of moving, I'll use that generalized verb, on right-of-way acquisition and easement acquisition as part of a sequence of this envisioned project. Can you help me see, help us see Little more precisely, the implementation sequence involved here, seeking authority tonight, would rights of ways and easements then be acquired immediately, or would you hang on to this authority, say, until some other threshold of project process occurs?

No, I mean, the critical one for us to move forward expeditiously with right-of-way acquisition was, of course, when the federal grant became obligated for right-of-way acquisition. That $2.4 million in federal funding is now sitting with CDOT, who is administering this grant. And so as we expand, we can get reimbursed from those grant funds. So one of the conditions the council wanted to see before we got to this point was that those right-of-way grant funds were in place. So that was a triggering event, obviously, to be here tonight. The other one is, as we think about that sequence, if you pass the resolution tonight, there are a couple of final offer letters that need to go out. Those were prepped and ready to go and would go out literally tomorrow morning. I'm probably somewhere in a two week time frame if we did not come to resolution with those final letters. And like I said, unfortunately, because of a BLT his position, I don't, you know, the Jackson's are just kind of stuck, I think, from a negotiating standpoint, because of a BLT his position, we would move forward with that particular case. To get that filed. That is there again, the critical path for us is immediate possession, which that hearing would occur probably within two weeks to four weeks after that filing. Our target date is to have right-of-way cleared and in possession by the beginning to the middle of September, so that when we are ready to go to bid, and this is one that Councilor Schmal is always talking about, which I totally agree with, is that you don't wanna have any contingencies in that bid package for final right-of-way acquisition or anything like that, so it can be as clean a bid package as possible. So that's really the timeline that we're on is, that kind of September to November timeframe when we wanna get that out to bid. And as we've had discussions at the work session, I think last meeting or the meeting before, as far as final grant obligation for the balance of the $49 million grant, roughly $47 million, getting to bid ready is that final step. And so this process of full right-of-way acquisition is part of that. Although CDOT and FHWA do view the step we're at once those final offer letters go out is actually right of way is cleared at that point because they understand that the court process is going to result in title vesting in us. In a project like this, the question of immediate possession is, I can't think of an instance where the condemning entity hasn't gotten immediate possession.

That's very helpful, especially because where I was kind of the bigger picture I was trying to conjure, and you helped do that mostly, but to recite it back just to be sure I understood, this authorization is good enough Dave Kuntz, As a signal to see dot to pursue the remaining federal money 47 million roughly. Dave Kuntz, But it might be a hiccup in the actual bidding process to get a contractor yeah if we don't pursue.

If you don't actually exercise the authority. It's not a hiccup if we just move through the process as I've described.

If you were to not do the process.

If we were to not do it, then that would cause us a problem at the bidding stage because we'd have to have some exceptions in that bid. And on a project like this, you just don't want to do that because that's going to cost. And our goal is to deliver a project cost-effectively and as efficiently as possible.

And the last question related, if this authorization prompts the actual actions that you described so clearly, letters in two weeks and negotiations, condemnation, whatever sequence plays out, and you do acquire some land or acquire some easements, and for whatever other reason, funding doesn't come through from the feds or otherwise this project does not happen. The city still owns those easements and rights of way.

Yes.

And to sell them back to the people when they're discovered they're not needed would require a vote?

That's correct.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Any other questions? Okay. We'll see none. Thank you, Carl. Thanks, everyone. Anybody from the public like to come forward? Will you state your name and whether you live in city limits or not?

I do not live in the city limits. Thank you. My name is Sandy Jackson and I am a member of the Jackson Family Ranch LLC. It is my family's ranch that you are currently discussing. I am a third generation Roaring Fork Valley resident. My parents bought the property in 1955. In 1990, my dad came to his four daughters and started discussing with us what we thought the future of the ranch should be. In 1995, my parents began putting the ranch in a conservation easement.

We did three phases.

All but the two acres surrounding our home is in a conservation easement. My father always said that other than his four daughters, the proudest thing that he had was to put the conservation easement on the ranch. My mother said we tried to do something really nice for the community. She died in 2018. I found a note of hers the other day that said we tried to do something nice for the Community apparently the city fathers don't feel the same. In 1996 there was a proclamation signed by the then mayor mark Adler of the city of glen and springs with the city council highly praising my family my parents were putting that conservation easement on there. Is it a negotiating tactic? No. Is it a love of the land? A love trying to save a bit of the past for the future? Yes. My three sisters and I are now the owners of the ranch. My husband and I manage and work the ranch. I chase cows today. I irrigated today. I killed weeds, I hope, today. Um, so we love that land. We have a tie to that land. We have had many girl Scouts there. We have had four H groups. We've had a lot of people on that piece of property. I'm asking you to consider very thoughtfully this decision that you're talking about, because it's not only taking a part of a family's heritage. But it's taking a part of the past for the future, what my father always quoted. I also strongly urge you to follow through with the county's request for the 1041 because we are county residents. I have not had the opportunity to vote for any of you. You are making the decision about my family's branch. But I don't have the option. I was a teacher for like 35 years, so teachers talk.

All right. Thank you. Thank you so much for being here. Anybody else from the public? Please state your name and whether you live in city limits or not.

Hi everyone, Tori Udall, thank you. I just want to say thank you. It's been an honor. I live in Carbondale, so it's been fun to observe you. You all have a thankless and important job and I just want to acknowledge that and thank you for all your time tonight. I am deputy director at Aspen Valley Land Trust. I wanna share a few remarks. We submitted the letter and I hope, and it sounds like many of you have reviewed it and considered it seriously. So as noted, we hold a conservation easement on the Jackson Ranch property. This is a perpetual conservation easement that expressly prohibits roads, bridges, grading, excavation, topographic alteration, and other activities required for the city's proposed public improvements. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Any attempts to move forward would require a formal condemnation process as Carl noted through court proceedings. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, The conservation easement must first be terminated by a judge through judicial proceedings. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, To summarize the letter that we shared with you the conservation easement on the Jackson ranch protects significant public values that were intentionally preserved forever. The easement protects open space, agricultural heritage, scenic views, wildlife habitat, wetlands, and a river corridor for the benefit of the public. This property provides habitat for bald eagles, river otters, elk, mule deer, black bears, northern leopard frogs, migratory birds, and the federally threatened Ute Ladies Trusted Orchid. The public has already paid for this conservation and the property is already dedicated to a public purpose. Federal and state tax incentives were granted to support permanent protection of the property and AVLT has the legal obligation to defend it. The financial consequences I would acknowledge for you all for the city are also likely far greater than you may have assumed. Colorado law requires valuation based on the property's value as if it were unencumbered by the conservation easement. The city may also owe damages beyond fair market value. Recent Colorado court decisions and state statutes recognize compensation for additional harm to scenic, aesthetic, ecological, and conservation values protected by an easement. In addition, AVLT granted permission for the city to pursue a 1041 application as requested by the county, which we believe would be the best way to fully vet this project and provide the public an opportunity to weigh in. Through a formal public hearing, we were not asked for our consent to submit a location and extent filing. So to wrap up, AVLT is legally obligated to defend this perpetual conservation easement given the significant conservation values at stake. the substantial public investment already made, the serious legal obstacles and the potentially enormous financial and reputational costs of condemnation, we hope that the city will pursue an alternative location rather than extinguish a protected conservation easement or at least consent to proper bedding through a 1041. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anybody else from the public? See none. We'll close the public portion, bring it back. To council, is there anything?

The only thing I would say is, Brian, do you want to pop that up for me? Yeah. I think it would just be helpful to understand where we're at on the Holy Cross and the Datsun Ranch properties. And I have no technological piece, so.

We're fully aware. Thank you.

Cool. So I just wanted to make sure that we're kind of clearly oriented with Holy Cross up here.

Can we make this bigger?

Maybe. I don't know. Now I got a new man.

Not Carl, somebody else. Don't touch it.

See, I touched it and I broke it. Probably won't let me speak. Yeah, I apologize.

Everybody knows.

John Gerstle, Anyway, I just wanted to kind of point out a couple of things that are going on there. John Gerstle, It is on pretty much on the property line between holy cross and the Jackson property. and John Gerstle, That better.

That is better. Thank you, Bree.

So you're going to see in the hatched area there where the impacted area is in the bluish color where the project is doing a relocated driveway. You can also see the revegetation area for the existing access road. And if the project moves forward, while we are keeping that right-of-way line, the goal would be is to do a lease back to that. What I would say a couple of things that are important here is that this preserves an access that is much safer for Holy Cross. It also creates and preserves an access that is capable of handling you know like a semi truck for agricultural purposes which just by by way of background because i grew up ranching too uh was always an important component of this there are a bunch of things that you do on a ranch that don't seem like a normal driveway and why do you need a truck that big and all of those kinds of things So those just so you kind of have a feel for that. And so the actual parcel, this actual parcel, I believe the underlying zoning is commercial. It is not rural agricultural and that is rezoned. Even though there's a conservation easement on it, that property is actually the underlying zoning is commercial. And so to the point from AVLT, that is how that property was with that current zoning, but without the conservation easement. That's how both the Jackson family's appraisal was done as well as the city's appraisal was done. So just to kind of flesh that out a little bit as to kind of where we're at, scope of impact, and then also just kind of acknowledging that this is commercially zoned and we did appraise it at those levels as did the Jackson appraisal. So I just wanted to wrap that up. Thanks.

Okay. Thank you. Back to counseling. We do need to move forward on this. So I am entertaining a motion resolution 2026. That's 11 Council checked.

Mayor regarding resolution 2026 dash 11. I'd move that we approve a resolution of the city of Glenwood Springs, Colorado authorizing the acquisition of real property interests necessary, including use of eminent domain authority to facilitate construction of the Southbridge project in support of improving public safety, reducing congestion, enhancing connectivity and supporting regional mobility.

OK, thank you. We have a motion to approve the resolution. Looking for a second. Councillor Wymer? I'll second. Thank you. A motion and a second. Any discussion? Start with Councillor Townsend.

Quite a few things here. In looking at the Southbridge piece, when I ran for council, I didn't have an opinion on what was the better way to go with that. And a lot of people ask us, what's your opinion on this? And I'm like, I just don't know enough about it at this point. I think I know a fair amount about it, even being a little late to the party here. But there's a lot of things that I think I've expressed in the past, but I'll bring them up here since we're really getting to a point where we're moving forward and however we're going to go here. But I think there's a lot of a lot of things here that are benefits to a lot of people other than the citizens of Glenwood Springs. Whether it's mobility for people to come through our city, which is a choke point essentially, I understand that. Whether it's people that work to the south of us that have businesses to the south of us that need people to get there faster and want them to get there faster, I understand that. Whether I look at the cost on this, we don't know what the cost is yet. We're moving forward with things without knowing the cost. We've got CDOT benefiting from it. We've got the county benefiting. The county appears to me to be the major benefactory of this bridge. If you ever wanted a bridge, this is probably going to be the cheapest and best time to get it done. On the other hand, we're picking up all the liability for something that appears to be benefiting a lot of other people. We're using eminent domain. This was very well brought up to us for something that's been a gift. I bike by that property probably two or three times a week, mainly during the summer. But when you bike by it, you look at this and you say, this was a gift to the people of the valley when they put that conservation easement on there, when they could have sold that property. And then to go back and say, now we're going to take eminent domain and take that away, put a major highway through and a bridge through it. I have a hard time supporting that. It's going to encourage growth up four mile. We saw what a traffic mess we had when we had stopping with some fire issues, and this is just going to encourage more and more growth, more homes, more traffic, and that problem is going to continue to get worse. I don't think combination is the right thing to do. I really question where the bridge is the right thing to do. I think there's benefits for a lot of people that aren't the citizens of Glenwood and for all of these different reasons put together, I just don't see a good reason to support this. So that's, I would not move forward with this.

Okay. Thank you. Council small.

So reflecting some of the same, concerns and issues that I've stated previously. I was here when the Jackson Ranch was put in the conservation easement and I remember just how great everybody thought that was. And it was because people were anticipating the kind of growth that we've seen happen here. And that was a chance to say, no, stop that. This is not a place where that's gonna happen. And the Jackson Ranch, thankfully was that piece of property to help make that statement. I've stated my case many times that I think this financially, this is a bad project for the city. It may be worse than we know, but it's bad even at the best case. It's a bad financial solution, proposed solution, to a problem that is already worse and will get worse because of this bridge, and that's the fear of the fire evacuation. That's a Trojan horse in my mind. Okay. I can think of a number of other reasons. I've highlighted some points in the resolution that I think are misleading. And I cannot support this resolution. This is where the rubber meets the road as far as I'm concerned for the city. And I say no. Okay, thank you.

Councilor Schacht.

Well, this is another dilemma in a legacy project that's gone on for a long time. I don't disagree with my two fellow counselors that have spoken. Um, however, the condemnation process right or wrong has been forced on us. I believe that the decision point is not now to be made. It wasn't last spring. It's if, and when we get to the point where we have bids, then for the very same reasons that Councilor Townsend and Councilor Schmoll have evaluated, then we have a full picture of should we proceed or not and who is the greatest beneficiary now and in the future. So for that reason, I would move forward until the point we cannot. Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else? Mayor Pro Tem Solinsky, please.

So I'm sitting over here with my head in my hands because I'm kind of sickened by this process. I wish it wasn't so. I knew there was probably gonna come a day where I was gonna have to sit up here and make a decision that was the responsible one that contradicts with my heart. And here we are today. But much to Councilor Schachner's point, we have an obligation to at least get it to the point where we can make an informed decision and there have been ample opportunities for us to evaluate whether or not this is something that serves our community it was tasked upon us five different mayors have seen this through City Council Chambers, I think that's the torch that we carry to the point until we can make an informed decision whether or not it's the best choice, and the only way we can do that is to get it to that bid process. City Council Chambers, So that's all I got to say.

City Council Chambers, Okay, thank you, Councilor Smith.

Dave Kuntz, going later is ever so convenient because previous eloquence saves me some words and saves everybody some time I. Dave Kuntz, really appreciate and and identify with the observations offered by. Dave Kuntz, answer small and answer townsley in terms of the clock kind of the qualitative or quality questions here and the Community respect, I also appreciate very much we heard from. Jackson family and from the land trust and feel very sensitive to those things but my additional concern more related to our responsibility I think is is in terms of cities commitment cities commitment of resources even if it's primarily funding from outside sources um well I appreciate very much the explanation about how this sequence might go if this authorization is approved, I'm just not persuaded. It would indeed, as we understand it, at least complicate a bidding process that would get more to a point that Councilor Schachter was describing, but I'm just not convinced that that's enough reason to move ahead and actually acquire land that may not be used. To acquire land for a project that is not yet fully approved and not anywhere near fully funded is, at best, premature and I think puts the city into Dave Kuntz, Legal situation, ultimately, perhaps an ownership situation and then an electoral situation if you decide, well, we don't need this land, after all, I think it's premature to move on this if indeed it's going to be exercised immediately, thank you.

Dave Kuntz, Thank you any other comments. Dave Kuntz, Good yeah okay well. So thank you, thank you for being here, I wish we could have started this conversation way earlier than than tonight. I. I didn't. Well, I'm in this position for not that long, but I probably should have reached out and I didn't. And I truly believe that maybe we could have discussed it on a different level in a different way and with a different outcome with a different manner. I don't know, but I'm hoping so in my head that that would have been an opportunity to do so. I I wish there was another way to get there. I really do. This is a project that's been in the works for 30 years, maybe plus that, whatever. Close to that, the bridge has taken many iterations. And as we all know, the bridge is not even a major part of this. It is traffic improvements on Highway 82 and so on and so on. I truly believe that we need to stick to the original intent of of what this bridge was planned for, and that is an evacuation ramp. You can say whatever you will. You can say I'm the expert in firefighting. I don't believe it. I don't believe it'll ever happen. It will happen. And at that point, we will be thankful. And Councilor Schachter, a couple of meetings ago, said it correctly. At some point, and we choose to do this put ourselves out there to be leaders of the community. At some point, we have to make a decision that will serve today and the future. And our job is to look into the future as good as we can and to make the best possible decisions, even if they're unpopular. And I'm going to have probably a sleepless night, but... I have to do what I feel is right for the citizens of South Glenwood, even for four miles. So what if we help out Garfield County? That's what we do. This is something that we lead in. We lead in an evacuation route to help people out. And I'm sorry, this is where we are. But we have to build this bridge for numerous reasons. And I agree with some of what you said. I agree with some of what Councillor Smith said. It is odd to purchase property if you don't even know whether you're going to do it or not. But given the given the process that we have to follow, we have to follow this process. We can't get around it. This is our next step. And to kill it now. I think would be foolish. We gotta get the bid so we know where we're at, and then we make the final decision. And I'm with you, Councilor Schachter, if this doesn't pencil out, I'm with you. We're not going to move forward. Yeah, we have spent some money on property, but we could easily. And I don't see a problem with the community taking a vote on this to give the property back. Yeah, we spent money, but so what? We tried. At least we tried. We tried to put this bridge in place that was intended 30 years ago as a second bridge. egress to Glenwood Springs as an evacuation route. And therefore, obviously, you can tell I'm in favor of moving forward. And if I don't hear any other comments, I'm going to call for the question.

PB, David Ensign — He, Him, No councilor Townsley yes mayor pro tems Lenski yes mayor damn yes Council whiner no council small no cancer Smith, yes, Council shakhtar passes for three.

PB, David Ensign — He, Him, Thank you Ryan. PB, David Ensign — He, Him, Okay, well, thank you again for being here, it was. PB, David Ensign — He, Him, um. It was impactful. I'm glad to hear from you. I wish it was sooner. And I wish we could have started this conversation sooner. I just do. So thank you anyway. Thank you for being here. Thank you. With that, I'll move into council comments so we can wrap this up for tonight. We'll start on the left with Councillor Townsley.

One comment tonight.

Microphone, please.

Thank you. know this comes from from our last meeting and and this forum was used as a or this dais was used as a a place to to make comments about a vote that's happened and you know going back to let's just call it what it is keep glenwood glenwood at the time that came out i voted for it i wasn't a strong majority one way or the other but i did vote for it I'd like to say if we said let's put this back to another vote because we want to repeal it, at this point I would vote for it again. I'd vote for it probably with more conviction. I think that a lot of people out there have said that this is what they want. They don't want project after project after project getting approved without their input, not necessarily without their input, but without them having any control over it. We appear to have as a city a constant drive to increase housing and growth and density. I think that we need to be selective in what we do, and I think we really need to listen to the people that voted for us and pay our salaries as a city. And saying that we want to get rid of something that a lot of people voted for, I just don't think that's right. But anyway, I just want to say that... I think we need to listen to the people that have come forward and said, this is how we want to do things instead of going, let's try to figure out a way to get around it. That's personal opinion, but that's my opinion.

Okay, thank you. Councilor Small. Okay, Mayor Pro Tem Selinsky.

A couple of things. Will we continue the bear proof container conversation and that's July 2nd?

Yeah, we'll continue with the next meeting.

Okay, perfect. I'm out playing tennis last night at the rec center, and that lovely new drinking fountain with the bottle filler is amazing, but it is seeping copious amounts of water. So could we have somebody look at that? I don't know. I watched it throughout the evening to see if it was because it's being used and it was overflowing. It's not very level, but it does seem to be seeping as it got cooler and darker. There was more water which and it wasn't being used so something's going on there somebody could come and look at that that'd be great. And finally, I just want to reiterate like I listened to the people of this town every single day. I think that. You know I commented at the time that that ballot initiative was written. The way that was written it sounded. Like something very compelling and I probably would have voted for it to. There is a lot of things that happened behind the scenes that I am now understand better than I did before I took this position. it's a daily process, but I don't ever want to leave anybody that lives in glenwood springs, with the impression that I don't listen. Just because I may make a decision that feels perplexing when you view it from outside, please reach out. I will happily explain any decision I make if it's unclear and stand behind it. And if there's a decision that is to be made and you feel that there is information I don't have, I hope that everybody knows they can reach out to me, whether it's phone, email, stop me at the grocery store.

Thank you. Councilor Smith.

Thank you. Harkening back briefly to the consent agenda that we already approved, I was really pleased to see that it included what's called a Colorado Community Circular Grant application, which would be used in our case to build a special processing facility at the landfill that will increase the rate of recycling diversion. That's a cool project anyway, but it's also kind of fun because we learned about that in part from our membership in Colorado Communities for Climate Action. They publish a twice monthly update on comment opportunities, but also funding opportunities. And this was one that they highlighted for us. I'm glad that it played through. I also was pleased, thrilled that we approved moving forward on the next phase of work on rebuilding Glenwood Park Streets. It's a remarkable neighborhood in so many ways, culturally and physically and recreationally. redoing the infrastructure there is going to be a really breakthrough good breakthrough but a really notion of respect for the neighborhoods and the neighbors and ultimately a great um celebration yet again of the importance of the 2a funding that goes into these projects um i wonder before we went into it about the fact that the contract approved has what seems like a pretty quick turnaround on phases of the design, 60%, 90% final, all within relative weeks. But I didn't see anything in that contract about public outreach and public comment and public opportunity to review and help have those neighbors were honoring help with the design. I got some initial assurance that somehow we will have that outreach and put an efficient for more assurance that there will be an opportunity to do that. Again, either from city manager said to me the other day or from from the engineering managers or the PR department.

Let me just say to all of us, is that all right?

Is all of us okay?

Oh, please. And thank you all for indulging it. I just want this project to be done well and be done in a way that people will buy into it.

I think the engineering department put a quick time frame on it because we have a grant application out for a project next year, the roundabout. If we get that money or a good portion of it, then we'll be able to start moving on Glenwood Park quickly. But there's no point that we would not do public input. So I think that the December was, can they get it done? Yes. Do we need it done by then? We'll see with these grant processes how they go, but we'll definitely be going out for all kinds of public input, just like we did on Blake Avenue and every other project that we have done thus far since Ryan has been here and their team's been great for reaching out to the public and getting meetings set up and doing them at the middle school or wherever makes sense to people and at a good time so people can actually attend them. So I don't think we have a whole lot of expectations from the consultant to be parts of those, but I'll let Ryan kind of explain.

Well, yeah, in a few things, right? So we intend as city staff to lead all the public meetings and we expect the consultants to provide information to us, exhibits and diagrams and whatnot. Part of that proposal is you'd see is they're actually going to fly the site with an aerial drone to help produce images, again, to help with those public meetings. Certainly the Brush Creek Mountain Park is a big aspect that we've already had several initial public meetings, not necessarily tied to this design, but certainly to get some information and some feedback from the public. And we certainly intend to do that. Additionally, we've already had a meeting with the Sopras Elementary community. administration and the school district administration to talk about um the kiss and go lane and trying to make it a little more clear and safe um and again our intention is to get to um one of those milestones that 30 milestone and then be able to go to the public with some really good concepts of both the roadways curb and gutter sidewalk drainage parking in the neighborhoods plus additionally the multi-use path that we are looking to put through through the area so Absolutely, we intend to engage the public. And that's 100% correct. And we have a very aggressive schedule with hopes that we can take advantage of some grants and really get going. Some of those roads definitely need some TLC sooner rather than later. So the hope is to be able to get going. So the public process is paramount to every project we do. And this one is no different.

Very reassuring. Makes the project that much better. Thank you very much. While you're there, at least while maybe Matt's there, we've had two quick succession power outages. And as I've followed the correspondence kind of minute to minute, and then after the fact, they're prompted by somebody else. That is a different utility. Meanwhile, we have our own utility that ostensibly gets power from another source. I could use at least for one and maybe a council if they're interested as a work session, a tutorial on how the grid works and why another company can shut our town down. And I wonder, I can ask for an appointment or I guess I'm asking whether the council, other members would like a workshop.

As some of us who have been here for a minute, we're aware how the grid works. So I would love it if you would do that on your own time.

I'm happy to sit down with any council member who wants to understand how Xcel Energy's transmissions lines function, how they're attached together, which ones were attached to, and the current construction that's occurring on almost all of them around us that you're probably not totally aware of, which makes yesterday's situation and what, three weeks ago's situation even more difficult, and their new fire regulations.

Yep.

So the fire regulations definitely complicates the turning back on of the situation. So we can go over all of that, but I'm happy to sit down with any of you one at a time, two at a time, whatever you would like, and we can go through those procedures.

Thank you. Councilor Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Selinsky has a suggestion if you want to hear a quick about that.

So I think in light of the point that Councilor Smith raises, it might be valid to have a brief community update that we have at the regular council meeting. 15 minutes that kind of goes through exactly what you just said and just catch people up because although Marco's been around and he knows it, not probably the average citizen is. And it's a question that keeps coming up again. And I think it would be reassuring to understand a little, maybe no less frustrating, but at least a little bit reassuring that, you know, our grid isn't in jeopardy because I think that's what it feels like.

Yeah, it does. It does feel like, but that's, and to be honest with you now, most of the people I speak to that are calling the all 1,287 of them that called the first power outage, um, where we responded to about 70 of them when there's emergencies or whatever it is, then we have the standard, you know, It's Excel. They're working on it. We don't know. Look at the map kind of thing, because they don't tell us a whole lot more than the map. But yes, I would say that the end of it is if you want like a 10 or 15 minute, I would currently questions in the public. I'm happy to, I'm not throwing a wall through Excel under the bus by any means. It's not their fault. They have regulations and they're in place for a reason. It's just seems frustrating because of that.

Yeah, I'm not asking for any like throwing anybody under the bus. I just think that sometimes understanding it doesn't make it less frustrating, but at least you're like resigned to the reality of it. And I think if, you know, because the underlying purpose is for safety, fire prevention, making sure that the whole system is as tight as possible. I think that that's something that's more relatable.

And I guess the point I didn't make was that everybody I've spoken to, once you explain it to them, they're like, oh, I'll go take a walk with my dog or whatever it is. I'll go see what my neighbors are doing. They're quite understanding of the situation once they kind of understand what the situation is. And it's been the same thing both times. And I'm not saying that you shouldn't get used to this.

So with a head nod, is this something we want to put on the actual agenda in the evening, like we had the fire update tonight, just for the power outages and update of what's going on? Is everyone in favor? Talk to you guys. Okay. All right. Let's do that. Thank you, guys. Steve, continue, please.

Thank you. It's really quick. Thanks very much. Appreciate it. I appreciate the affirmation from Councilor Zielinski. The three quick party things. I was impressed to see today, the day before Strawberry Days, The parks manager is not here, but whether it was park staff or public work staff were out putting on new light poles on the river trail immediately adjacent to the two rivers park bridge just on that pathway north. better lighting, downward directed in keeping with our newly revived outdoor lighting ordinance, and just look really nice. And they were out there cranking them today. So just in time for the festival. And see you at festival tomorrow. See you at Bike Their Day on Wednesday. Thanks very much.

All right. Thank you, Councilor Schacht. Microphone, please.

Um, I would hope, um, in a fairly timely fashion we get from legal and our city manager, an update on Vogel R and how we are going to acquire that. And second would be just a confirmation that our recent charge to housing and, and PNZ is gone forward to the commissions. And the third would be a comment related to tonight that comes up constantly. the dilemma between listening and agreeing that we deal with the public. And we may not agree up here, but we're the only ones that are charged legally with looking after the best interests of Glenwood. And we don't have to agree, but that's our charge. The audience that comes is very often One narrow segment of that. And we, yes, we should listen. We did, but what does, if we don't agree, doesn't mean we're not listening and that's our role. We're the only ones really charged with that. And it's a tough one. Thank you.

Thank you. Council.

Proposition to a, if left in place, PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Will prove to be an unmitigated disaster for this community of a long term. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, And it's and it's PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Near permanent effects will show to run exactly counter to what people say their intentions were when they put it on the ballot. And I am going to take some future opportunities to continue to express and detail out my point of view. I also welcome any and everyone to convince me otherwise. And I say again, I am looking for a spirited and savvy community leader to step up and lead the charge probably initially at a grassroots level to educate the public toward an eventual hopeful ballot initiative to repeal the thing in whole or in part. Second, the confluence and the gardens We've got to get our act together around this confluence, right? I say that a lot. We need to get our act together. And it's just that I think we have so many acts. Most of them are together. But what I don't want is to end up telling these lovely people whom we all support literally and conceptually in their plan, find somewhere else. I don't want to be able to, I don't want to have to tell them you can't have the confluence while at the same time we don't have anything better. We don't have, we treat them as an alternate proposal when in fact we don't have a primary proposal. And so I don't know what it's going to take. I don't think it's the DDA's charge. I don't know that it's necessarily the council's charge. I think it's some sort of cross-section of a lot of different groups and organizations and obviously public input and stuff. And I know we've gone down this road before, probably a lot of times. But things are coming to a head. right back to 2A, we are limited in what we can do. And so we've got to do it once and we've got to do it correctly. And it's got to be done with enough thought that we bring all the right people along with us at the time. So it's an observation. I support the garden people. I want them to be incredibly successful. I don't know that I want them at the confluence, but I don't have a different place to put them. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Nor do I have anything else that would go into that for a person. Right. So, PB, Harmon Zuckerman, T in this up. I'm not looking for head nods really anything more than that or anything tonight. I'm just kind of tossing it out there that we've, we've got to figure out this confluence PB, Harmon Zuckerman, And and move forward confidently with a plan. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you. PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Council small

I agree with your assessment of the confluence. I was really surprised at the DDA's response and how they thought their plan was done and they'd worked on it for it's been in place for 20 years and they were ready to execute it and take it over. I was really taken off guard by that. When I looked at the confluence plans from 20 years ago, I thought, yes, that's what people were dreaming pie in the sky back then. I think I even suggested to Bree that it ought to be off our website. So if we don't get something going there solid, someone else is going to try to fill in that void and it's going to be out of our control.

Thank you. Okay, that was Council comments. I don't have much but I agree with the confluence and I kind of alluded it when they were here. I really think we should take a greater look at it. We have a we have a parking lot that has a certain size. We have a berm that belongs to Rafta, but may be able to be negotiated away if we do it correctly that all adds acreage to a wonderful wonderful triangle that we could do a lot with um it's way too big for a park for us to be able to maintain this like i said earlier let's bring other parties in and do a collaboration of Commercial aspects, a restaurant on the river, concession stands, ice cream, espresso, I don't care. Even a smaller botanical garden, an event space, and a parking lot along the street. We already have a street. Let's put it along the street. Why do we need to build internal roads when we could put the parking along the street? Do the connection to the river in the center. There is opportunity. There's enormous opportunity for us to actually talk about this entire triangle from the pump house to the river. and make maybe a lot of people happy with what we could do between parking, amenities, and river access. So I agree with the comments that it's time to maybe talk about. The design that the DDA put forward came about after COVID, I think. It was initiated, the river park with the bulb outs into the river, I think was a deal after COVID, after the fire, the frustration, the depression, you know, the kind of thing is like, let's do something nice for the, let's bring something forward. And that's not that old. So I first time I saw it was about two weeks ago when I got the email. So, I think it's something to start thinking about it, and I don't know how we're going to go about it, but it's out there, and I think we should start moving in that direction, whatever it takes. We need to charge somebody with it, but we'll figure it out eventually. So with that, I'll go over to City Manager.

About a week ago, you guys got what I thought was an unnecessarily angry and disrespectful and kind of accusatory email from somebody who had stayed at the Best Western Antlers and was charged a $10 fee and was upset about that and was given the explanation that city council had passed a fee that was mandatory, which prompted a phone call for me to the general manager of the Best Western. She called me back. Her name's Dana. She was very nice. And she said, I know exactly what happened. We have a brand new employee. There was some miscommunication. I do think two or three people were told that. I'm aware of it. Won't happen again. And I believed her when she said that. So I don't think it's an issue, but I do think that sometimes, you know, you guys just get kicked in the shin for doing absolutely nothing wrong. And that was one of those.

I responded to the gentleman and I said exactly that.

Good. I responded to my response.

Mine was very nice and long. Yours was not that nice. I mean, there's a little mother bear, all right.

I get it. That's good for me.

Thank you. Carl.

Yeah, just a couple of quick things. We had a technical issue during the special meeting we had earlier where we had an exec session and you came out and you voted to defend the lawsuit that the county brought. I just wanted to make sure that was kind of out there. There will be minutes of that meeting, but there was a glitch with the zoom recording for some, and like tech sometimes bites you. So I just wanted to make sure that like in something that was being broadcast to the public, but I acknowledge that you guys gave us authorization to defend that lawsuit. So anyway, that, that was really it. And I'll see you guys on Saturday in a beer tent, I guess.

That's right. That's what we're going to do. And the correspondence, I know we had a few letters, but I think we all read them, I would think.

Yeah, we got something from Molly Hamilton, Lisa DiMiento, Ellen Friedman, all regarding Midland. Council received many more comments about many more issues, but these three were the ones that showed a desire to be in the packet.

Okay, thank you very much, Ryan. And Mayor Pro Tem Selinsky, social event, if there is such a thing. getting late, but it's getting late. Never too late.

I think if we can, if we're going to reconvene, it's going to have to be at Vax. I think that's right.

Thank you. And with that, I entertain a motion to adjourn.

I still move.

And I need a second. Councilor Weimer. Oops, I turned you off. Second. Thank you. Call the question. Got to finish out. One more. Thank you.

Unanimous. It passes.

Thank you, Ryan.