Council - Regular Meeting

I call to order the city of Glenwood Springs regular city council meeting. It is December 4th, 2025, second to last meeting for the year. Ryan, would you please take a roll call?

Mayor Dame here. Mayor Prom Zalinski, Councelor Townsley, Councelor Schmall, Councelor Wymer, Councelor Shaker, Councelor Smith. We have a quorum. Thank you, Ryan. Any uh uh changes to the agenda? We'll see none. Any disclosure of uh conflict of interest by counselors? Also see none. Excellent. We'll move into citizens appearing before council for items that are not on the agenda. And you guys know the drill. You got three minutes. Please state your name and whether you live in the city

or not. I don't have my glasses. I don't know how this is.

Oh god, I can't see out of these. You're welcome to mine. They're not very highowered, but you welcome. We'll never be I just have one just Thanks. Good evening, council and Mayor Dem. I uh think you all should go out and look at the moon. It's gorgeous. My god. But anyway, I wanted to start with I'm really your name and whether you live in the city or not. Lori Chase. Oh, [laughter] good. Lori Chase and I live here in Glenwood. Thank you. Sorry about that. No worries.

Anyway, um, take a look at the moon and I'm really pleased with the speed cameras, but that's not what I'm here for. I'm here about an incident that I had happened to me, my experience on Sunday with a police officer. So, I just wanted to read really quickly the mission statement of the police department. I and it says to protect with integrity and courage and to serve with honor and compassion. Then it goes on the law enforcement code of ex ethics. I'm not going to read the whole thing, but it says I will maintain courageous calm in the face of danger, scorn or ridicule, develop self-restraint, and be constantly mindful of the welfare of others. It goes on to say in the next paragraph, I will enforce the law courteously and appropriately without fear of favor, malice or ill will, never employing unnecessary force, never accepting gratitude. So that being said, the police are civil servants just like all of us, all of you guys, and [laughter] we're supposedly the bosses, but I don't think so. Anyway, my first email was to John Hassel and it was Sunday, November 23rd at 12:33 p.m. right after the officer left. Hi, John. So far, the last 10 or 15 minutes or so, one of the officers, or at least somebody in the Glenwood Spring Police Department car blocked our driveway. I asked him very politely if he could move his car out of the driveway since it was our only ingress and egress. He informed me that he would take the time he needed regardless of what I needed. And he said, "Too bad. You're just going to have to wait." is what his words to me were. And um [laughter] as you can imagine, that didn't sit very well with me. But when I asked for his badge number, he said he didn't have

one. And and I just looked at him. I go, "You're behaving like an ass." he would not identify himself. And he goes, "Well, so were you." And then I [snorts] I did say that I was going to talk to Chief Hassel and he goes, "Go right ahead." He was very snarky in his response. At least that's how I took it. Then I wrote something to Steve and Marco. I just sent this off to John Hassel and I want something done about that. This is really uncalled for. The man was rude, would not give his name. I would like to remind him that the police department, everyone that works for the city, you actually work for us. And I did not approach this man in a rude manner.

That was three minutes, unfortunately. Yeah. [laughter] Yes, it was. Well, I never received any calls back from anyone. Nothing was I I wrote back to you. Yeah, you did. Okay. But uh the chief of police did not or John Hassel did not. And that's wrong. You don't tell somebody too bad so sad. Okay. Thank you, Lori. Before we move into the next one, is there Steve, is there anything we uh we could look into or is this something we need to address or how do you feel?

Yeah, I I've looked into it along with chief and uh deputy chief. I did talk to Lori about this and just so you guys know, I asked John not to call it back because I was so okay. So, so if there's any additional stuff that should be done, you guys are going to handle that, right? Okay. Excellent. Thank you. Thank you. Can I be included on that? No. If they know what they're doing, so we're going to have to leave it to them. Anybody else? Please name and whether you live in the city or not.

Uh Ned Carter. I live in Glennwood Springs. Have for about 12, [clears throat] 13 years. Owned for a little over five. My first experience with Glenwood Springs was when I was hit when Terry was police chief by a California plate, California license, no insurance. Glenwood refused to give him a ticket for no insurance. I was left holding the bag. My next wonderful experience was with John that uh he was, excuse my language, playing king [ __ ] cop running along at least 10 miles an hour faster than the speed limit in the lefth hand lane. I gave a copy of the C CD to uh Joe Daryus. Didn't want to make it formal, but he keeps saying, "Well, you wouldn't say you took it." Fifth Amendment. I know police officers hate our Bill of Rights. Then we come down to uh Officer Hampton who responded to my call of an oxygen delivery vehicle sitting in a handicap spot. She told me, "If he doesn't have a placard, he'll get a ticket." Didn't happen. Then in February, I was out of town. I've got a nice 99 Lexus on the street. A false police report was made and accepted claiming it was stolen, but it's registered right across the street. Insured current plate looks nice, but I got a red tag. You don't do them everywhere. Selective malicious. Uh, I requested NY because somebody that works for Glenwood Fire, our fine city manager, can attest to that. I was pushing since what, June,

for them to get on the plate on their Montana car and they've been here. Oh, it got ticketed in 2001 and was never touched again. I requested through Cora, which John seems to have a problem with. all the information. I was given a narrative and the heavy set girl down in the police station, well, you can make another request. That wasn't what I requested. I'll give you I'll send you all a copy of what I requested. Then I had an issue where that man back there works for Glenwood City supposedly of the fire marshall has made us less safe in our building. He actually told me when the unit above below me, "Well, you've got a fire detector. I might not look disabled, but it's surprising what $2,000 a week in meds will do. COVID vaccine, one dose. I'm still waiting. I'm sorry. I made that request back in February. I finally got the information today. I paid for it back in March. And there's more. But

and the same goes for you. I'll be in my three minutes. I'll see you again so we can continue this conversation. All right. Thank you. And I hope you all have a very nice evening and thank you for your service. Thank you. Uh again, um appreciate you two being here and and pointing this stuff out. Is there anything we need to um Steve? No, I'm happy to talk to to take care of it. Okay. All right. Great. Thank you. All right. Thanks everybody. Anybody from anybody else from the public here to speak on items not on the agenda?

We'll see none. We'll close the uh public portion of the meeting and we'll move into a council announcements. I wouldn't respond since they left the room in my opinion, but um I think we should just let it be. It's up to me guys. You got a short comment. Okay. If it's at if it's an angry comment at them, I don't I don't want you to say it. I will not say anything to them. All right.

Somehow I cannot turn I I can't taking the safe route. How's that?

All right. I am not speaking for council, but we do have a provision for council to respond to public comments and I believe in transparency and I believe we have this item for items not on the agenda, but I do take offense and I have a low tolerance for people who use that for specifically accusing staff and using it, which for us is hearsay. And as a complaint procedure, we have a city manager who will take personnel information anytime and we have thousands of responses from our public safety officers and very few if any negative responses. So, I just want to say as one of your council people, I take offense for using the public agenda for that kind of accusation and disparagement and I hope it doesn't continue. We can use our city manager as the correct venue for that. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Shakar and Council Schmall. Yeah, I share your frustration with people getting their three minutes of time to complain about something, but I also I also believe that our goal as a city, our goal, it's been adopted, is to be customer oriented. The citizens are our customers. And I would respectfully suggest that they tried in their minds they tried to resolve the issues before they came to tell us about them. Uh somehow that wasn't enough that they felt they had to come and give it to us here. Um, so, uh, there's always always two sides and while we may have tried to appease their complaint, we maybe could try more. I don't I don't know. But think of it from a customer service standpoint. If the customer is not happy, we haven't achieved our goal completely.

Okay. Thank you. Valid comments. Anything else? Councelor Townsley. I was going for council comments. I was move this along. I don't know the whole story, so I don't Council announcements, you mean? All right. Council Townsley.

Okay. So, uh, from the recck department, couple things. The bizaar is this Saturday, 9 to4. Uh, there's going to be 54 vendors there, way more than they have had in the past. Uh, they're looking forward to it. Uh there's going to be all sorts of uh good things there. The the other piece that's going on until then, the Black Friday sale on memberships to the community center and whatnot goes through the end of the bazaar, it's 15% off and it's really actually 20% off because when you go into next year, it's going to be the fees are going up by 5%. So if you know of anybody they want to get something, I don't know why we're giving it this way. I think we should have less because we need more money for parks and wreck, but apparently we're doing it, so we should tell everybody about it. So, 20% off basically if you get your pass before the end of the bazaar. And then on New Year's Eve, uh, from 12 to 3, they're going to have free music over there, free games, the ice skating will be free, the pool's going to be free. So, there's a time for anybody to come and look at the community center and take advantage of that and have a good time down there.

Oh, great. Thank you. Free, free, free stuff from your government. That's excellent. 11.

Thank you, Dave. Anybody else? Any announcements? Councelor Smith? Transportation Commission met this week and among other things had I still like this word had a robust discussion um about bike sharing, the bicycle share concept that the city council has um entertained and discussed with RAFTA, with we cycle over the time. Um it's a service that's in many other towns in the in the valley but not in Glennwood Springs. Um transportation commission has a long-standing recommendation that city should not invest in bike share until a basic threshold of connectivity for bicycles is complete in the town. They realize that they need to help define that. So they spend a good long session trying to pick particular locations and gaps in the continuity of that network. And so they're coming um gradually with another discussion or two after this week's uh to bring back a a recommended cookbook. Uh city engineering and city transportation staff were there at the meeting and so we're contributing and we're bouncing ideas really well. It was a very productive discussion. Uh you may have noticed either just by passing by or by conversation that Silver Sage neighborhood is back in business. Uh this is the the project that among other things built the what I like to call the teacher housing out toward the airport on Airport Road uh down the base of of the hill where the water tanks are. Uh above the water tanks there was approved in 2012 or 13 I think. um a series of duplexes, 20 duplexes with with 40 houses. Uh that has started. The grading

has begun. The the access road is plowed up there from the four mile road side. So is a is active. I've already heard from two citizens. You may hear from people what's going on up there. Uh so 40 duplex homes coming in gradually up there. Um this is not a city project, but it's a a city visibility. the the rock retaining wall along South Midland got spruced up in the last couple of weeks in some really cold weather. Hardworking people were out there under contract to somebody uh replastering and repainting that wall. It looks much nicer. Um little bit of extracurricular activity. The Glenn Springs Kowanas Club is uh taking on refinishing and repainting the furniture from Bethl Plaza. It's going to be this weekend a three-day project the club is taking on. Uh it's going to end up being transforming [clears throat] those kind of worn chairs and tables into the nice gleaming color matching the color just recently deployed on North Landing um with a net uh savings to um DDA the development association responsible for all this with net savings to DDA of about $20,000. So, it's kind of a fun teamwork project all made possible in in turn by a fleet maintenance building uh providing a bay over the weekend where there'll be heated space to do this work. So, it's really kind of a fun little effort. Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you. Any other announcements? We see none. I'd just like to add to uh councelor counsel's announcement that uh if you feel like uh having a chat with your favorite or least favorite counselors, we will be at the bazaar this Saturday from 9 to 1. So, anybody that wants to come in and give us kudos or not, um come see us at the bazaar between 9 and 1. I think we're all going to be there at one point or another. You get the knot.

Yeah, I get the knot. That's fine. No problem. So if I see no other announcements then I will move into the consent agenda. Hey with nine items on it and I'm entertaining a motion for the consent agenda. Mayor Prom Solinski. I move to approve the consent for Blenda as written. Thank you. We have a motion to approve. Councelor Townsley. I second that. And a second. Any discussion about the consent agenda? I see none. Um, all in favor say I.

I. And those opposed. We'll see none. Excellent. Thank you. Consent agenda is approved. Moving into our actions and/or presentations for tonight. Item seven tonight is the school district RE1. And they're here with an update and a f a request for financial assistance. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I can kind of tee this one up.

Yes, please, Steve. Uh we have supported the Roaring Fork School District uh in Glennwood Springs schools for some youth mental health counseling for a number of years now. Uh the school district did not make a request during the regular budget cycle this year for that funding uh because they were pursuing other possible avenues and didn't really have a very specific request. We've expected this to come forward. They're going to give us a quick update on uh the uh [clears throat] results that they've had in their counseling with Hope Center and then there will be a request for funding for $160,000 for marijuana and tobacco tax that you guys consider when they're can consider when they're finished.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Steve. We'll give them a minute to set up the presentation and Oh, it's already there. Excellent. Look at that. Great. Thanks. Well, good evening. My name is Anna Cole, superintendent Roaring Fork Schools. With me is Kelly Medina, director of student family services. Um, we're here on an update uh of our partnership with the city of Glenwood Springs around school-based mental health. For the last couple years, um the city has invested funding in the schools, a lot of the tobacco and marijuana tax funding, um to provide school-based mental health clinicians in our public schools in in the city of Glenwood Springs. Um we have been moving because of pressures on funding and some of the blended funding to support this work. We have been moving towards scaling down um this project and looking at we we have continued to look for alternate funding sources some of which we've secured to keep the project moving um and to keep those positions in our schools but are back because of um continued concerns about student well-being. Um and the current request is for $160,000 which would which would support the funding of two school-based um mental health providers at Glman Springs middle one at Glman Springs Middle School and one at Glman Springs High School. We have other funding from the Colorado Department of Law for a second position at Glman Springs High School. Um so just want to give you a bit of an update on the program. Um, you know, we've done this for a few years and it's been a remarkable program in terms of increasing access for students to school-based mental health um, services for reducing stigma around access. And as if you look into the packet, there's pretty um, great reports from Aspen Hope Center, who is our contractor, that the Aspen Hope Center actually uh, staffs and trains and supports the school-based clinicians. And so their annual reports have a lot

of data about impact and usage and who's connected. Um, one of the things that we are most proud of in this partnership is that you actually see access to school-based mental health that reflects the the uh racial linguistic diversity of our community, which is really exciting. We're seeing all kids equally accessing these services. Um, we are we are making this ask again, I think particularly this fall. We continue to see mental and behavioral health needs that exceed our educator and counselor capacity specifically around suicidality um of our students. I think we've seen as a nation and certainly in the state of Colorado um increases in in uh I would say depression, suicidality with teenagers and that is still here and still present um in our communities and and we really believe that these services are critical for keeping kids safe and well. Um just an overview of the services. This is our current program year status 2526. So you can see how we blend funding to create um to strengthen access for school-based mental health. You can see our partners from town of Eagle Pitkin um Carbondale. The Hope Center does a lot of fundraising and grant writing. We've had a a a long run with the Colorado Department of Education School Health Professional Grant that has helped fund these positions and um that grant will sunset for us at the end of this school year. Um which is why we are planning to scale back this program um across the district and we'll really be focusing on trying to preserve services at our high schools and middle schools where possible. So you'll see this is kind of how we're starting to look at the 2627 school year where we see funding being able to be leveraged. Um, I would correct and actually add that pit king also does invest in the Carbondale schools. So, that's just an error on this slide. Um, we were able, uh, Kelly Medina and her team were able to secure a Colorado Department of Law

grant that'll cover us for the next three years to have a school-based mental health provider at Glowwood Springs High School. So, we're really grateful for that support from the attorney general's office. Um, and so the ask from city of Glenwood Springs, this 160,000 would help us fund those two positions. um help us ensure that we still have two positions at Glenn Springs High School, one at Glman Springs Middle School. um a little bit of information of why we see the these programs being incredibly um helpful, impactful, and very well aligned to I think the intent of a lot of our tobacco and marijuana taxes which were meant to really reduce the needs of and be you know taxes that we could increase revenue to then help offset um and prevent the kinds of behaviors that lead to tobacco and marijuana usage particularly in youth. um have also shared with with council the Aspen Hope C Center's annual report um that we're really grateful for partners at the Hope Center that they provide as as part of these services. Um happy to take your questions on the program and either Kelly or I happy to respond and if you have things that come up later um please don't hesitate to reach out.

All right, thank you very much for the information. Always good to see you. Uh back to uh council for questions. We'll start with councelor Schm. Do you know do you know at this point the enrollment percentage increase or decline in the schools this year?

Um it's a little different for every school. So it's been up somewhere in the like two to six% I would say is our range. like our Glenwood schools were seeing um you know the only school that everybody declined. We projected that all our schools would decline um a little bit uh due to a number of different reasons. It's interesting when we look at withdrawal data it's a little bit um all we know is where kids are going and we see a lot of kids moving to Western Garfield. We see kids moving to the front range. We see kids and families moving out of state. We see kids and families moving out of country and almost equal proportions of all of those. So, there's a lot of pressures that I think are shaking our enrollment. Um, Glowman Springs Elementary is actually holding steady for us right now in terms of enrollment. We're seeing dips um larger declines at Soprus, at Glowman Springs Middle School, and Glowman Springs High School. Um, so probably in that 2 to 5% is is kind of what we're thinking. I will I'll be quite honest with you. We had a demographer last fall do a um kind of a 10-year demographic study for the entire Roaring Fork school district that really projected that we would start to drop and then hold at about 5 to 10 years. Um we built our budgets this school year based on those projections and 10 out of our 12 schools came in lower than those projections. Um the only schools that met or were slightly above were Glennwood Springs Elementary and Basalt Elementary. I guess so is the school enrollment had been increasing.

Yes. So it's a swing from the percentage increase to the 6% decrease, right? And the swing is probably more than 6%.

You know, we just recently were looking at some data. The Colorado School Finance Project annually gives us kind of this 20-year study on our enrollment and special student populations and staffing ratios and budgets and inflation and salaries. And it was really fascinating to look at the enrollment trends for the Roaring Fork schools. I think what we saw was similar to to kind of state of Colorado where we saw enrollment kind of grow up until COVID and then we saw a big drop where a lot of kids and families just stayed home um during those years and not all of them came back. So there's been kind of a slow pickup for us. It's a little complicated our our enrollment history because Two Rivers Community School was a charter school that wasn't part of the Roaring Fork schools and then in 202122 became part of the district. So we see this bump in our enrollment in 2122 when they joined us. But I think if you took that out, you do actually see kind of this leveling and then what the demographer has projected is is a slow decline and then a stabilization in the next 5 to 10 years. We actually because the projections um were not quite accurate, we re-engaged with our demographer and are are expecting in the next month revised projections for the next 10 years. Um, so it's an it's an interesting it's certainly something we could revisit as a team because I think it's it's interesting for who we are as towns and communities looking at these projections. Um, they follow trends across the state of Colorado, across the country. And I think for us it's complicated by cost of living um to make some of these feel a little bit more uh pronounced at the moment. But it's definitely something that we're trying to as a district wrap our heads around um and manage. and it feels like we're uh trying to keep up right now with with trying to really grasp where enrollment is and where it's going. It's a really interesting and and complicated picture of our communities.

Thank you. One other question. The a big part of the motivation is uh wellness uh suicide prevention. Have there have there been suicides in the schools in the past couple of years? you know there it's I don't I can't state the specific data on that. I can tell you that we have absolutely done we you know we monitor and manage uh screeners. We do suicide screeners for kids that um are indicating to us that they're struggling. Um we know again we don't really track because we don't own this data but we know that there have been children over the past couple months that have been hospitalized for active suicideation um because we work with them and their families when they re-enter to when they come back to school to make sure that they have safety plans and trusted adults and that we've got eyes on them um when they're with us and that we're then coordinating with community partners to make sure kids and families have support. So there are absolutely um I think we would we would say particularly this fall suicideation among our teenagers in and around Glenwood Springs, Carbondale, Western Glenwood feels concerning.

Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Smith. Is this a time to be asking questions of city staff or just of the presenters? You you can do both. Great. Thank you.

Um I I'm a little embarrassed I didn't track this detail at the time when you you gave us an updated sheets on the city budget for the marijuana and tobacco money as part of the nice background. That was very helpful. I didn't look at it in that level of detail at the full city budget time, but I thought that some of this that marijuana and tobacco money is also going to activities in parks and recreation department. Yeah, that's correct. We have $100,000 that goes to youth passes uh for afterchool activities when they don't have somewhere else to go. So that's the money that's [clears throat] reflected in here as transferred to general fund. Correct.

Sure. Thank you. And so we still are able to this a request like this is not going to cut into that? No, sir. Between U marijuana and tobacco, we have about $410,000 of available reserves. This $160,000 request could be granted and we would still have about $250,000 left. We expected this this request to come. Sure. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? No. So, councelor Wymer,

Anna, you kind of finished that last statement that you're concerned about. So, one kid is too many, right? You should be concerned about that. But just thoughts or or insight into how are we relative to other other communities, other valleys, other parts of the state, whatever.

Great question. you know, we are probably within three to four months of um having our data from our Healthy Kids Colorado survey and that is our best comparative comparative data that that would answer that question and I think I've shared that with council in the past. It's a it's a survey we do ever in odd years. We get the data way too late. It's not tied to individual kids. So it it's sometimes quite frustrating for us because it's not actionable and it will it has a lot of questions about suicideation. Have you attempted suicide? Those sorts of things. Um so I I would love to get back to you on that because we're very close. The kids took the survey this fall. We've got some data. We what we don't have is the trend data and the the comparative data yet. Um

historically we tend to be a little higher than the state. um a couple percentage points for our students as compared to our region which is kind of western slope over to Grand Junction um and as compared to the state um there's some area I mean in this the healthy kids Colorado survey looks at a number of risk and protective factors from how much how many fruits kids eat to how much exercise to whether they feel bullied um on their way to school in their communities at school where at school um and it gets into a lot of risky behaviors around suicide iation, depression, anxiety. Um, and so I would love to follow up and and provide you all with that information because it's very interesting and it helps us, I think, monitor trends. Um, you know, it's fascinating. I think a testament to our towns and cities. When we instituted tobacco taxes, we actually saw concrete data from our students. There's questions about how easy is it for you to get vape pens, tobacco, and we saw in the years that followed those changes um and pushing age limits and getting rid of flavor bans, kids saying it's harder to access those things. So, we do see that data responsive to some of the policy moves that our towns and counties are making. Um but I would love to and I can follow up with Steve when we have that data and share that with you because it would answer that question really well.

Yeah. Yeah, that'd be great. And then and then this next one, I mean, it's out of our control. I'm just asking more out of I think just general curiosity like what's the linkage in your guys's opinions or the research that you guys have read like social media cell phones and h you know having the phones in the classroom or not in the classroom like does that have any sort of bearing or consequence on mental health? That's like the million-dollar question. Uh we think so, right? I think so too. We think so. Um it just feels intuitive.

It feels like it. Um, and it's something, you know, it's so interesting. We have very, uh, every school in our district has cell phone policies. Um, and they're a little different at all the schools. Um, Colorado State, the legislature has required us to have a district policy on cell phones by the end of the school year. Kelly's leading a lot of work with some of our family advisory councils to do a first draft of that. It'll come before our board this spring. We'll have some community input sessions on it. Um, but we are grappling with our families about kind of where we need to be with social media. Not social media, but really screens in schools.

Um, I I think it's a complicating factor and you know, our obligation to our students and our community is that we create highquality learning environments and I can certainly say from being a parent of teenagers that a screen is not conducive to a healthy learning environment. Um, and so we're we're really trying to figure that out and how do we balance that and balance that especially during a time when many of our students, especially our secondary high school students, are caregivers for their younger siblings and are the person that is called if their first grade, you know, first grade sibling is sick. Um, a lot of our students are um taking care of their parent like they need that connectivity is also important. So it's it's tough. Um but I would say we we think it's a factor that contributes and um you'll hear more from us on how we're going to manage that in schools this year.

Yeah. Um I will say like even within the high school student groups that um I help facilitate these meetings, they're also very divided. Like they feel like a cell phone's a really helpful and powerful tool, but it also it's going back to the point of like how are we safeguarding it as families. Um because there's also that dark side of it. Um, and I think part of that cell phone policy work is also in hopes in the future providing better education to parents. Like it's a powerful tool and it also kind of comes with like a caution like a disclosure sign of like for sure. Yeah.

I did just literally last night sent out our community newsletter with a whole ton of resources for parents saying please keep your kids off screens over the breaks. Um because it is there. I mean it's it's not conducive to learning and I and I think you know a lot of the research is starting to point that it's so damaging it's well wealthy. Yeah. Social media is just awful. Yeah. So good luck with all of that. [laughter]

It definitely takes a village. And so you'll you know we have we're planning on a safety forum at the end of January. I expect social media to show up, cell phone policies to show up that that way. And then you know these cell phone policies I know people are very interested. So those are community conversations. you know, we we only have kids 27% less than 27% of their waking hours. Um, so that's a lot of time when they're not with us and we hope they're at the rec center. We hope they are um, you know, engaging socially outside of our schools and we really appreciate that we have with the city on those.

Thank you, Council Shack. Uh, just a quick question. And I noticed from your um funding slides, Up Valley the couple counties have helped. Um Down Valley, has Garfield County been a participant in the past? I understand. Or did you make an ask this year as well? You know, not in this way with school-based mental health. Um it's been tricky.

You know, there's Garfield County covers three school districts. Um Pitkin covers two. Eagle covers two. Um, and Garfield has yet to really support in this way in our schools. I mean, I will say, um, and a lot due to Kelly's leadership. She has she oversees our family resource center. All the Garfield County school districts now have a family resource center. Kell's kind of the big sister and mentor to a lot of those programs. Um, Aspen Hope Center over time has built relationships. There is school-based mental health happening in Garfield RE2 and in um uh Garfield 16 parachute battlement Mesa. Um but we have yet to be successful on leveraging any county dollars to support this work but the u we continue to work on that.

Thank you councelor Towns. Uh one quick question just since this is about mental health a lot. What are we doing as far as violence in the schools? You know we read about these things. How are we approaching this to be on the front of that versus the back reactive side of that?

Great question. Um, you know, two years ago when I first stepped into the role, we did a series of community safety forums because it's really important for me that as the Roaring Fork schools, we can say that we're doing everything reasonably possible to keep our schools safe. Um, I would say, and I know we talked about this a little bit during work sessions, our our real lane as educators is to be trusted adults and build relationships with kids. We want to be the people kids come to when they have concerns about each other, about themselves, about things they're reading, seeing. Um, and so we really feel like our best and first line of safety is relationships with kids so that they can come to us when there are they have concerns. They're actually the best source of information um when it comes to violence in the schools. Then there are a number there's there's a lot of research around um how we keep schools safe. Um there's this the kind of the the theory of these five pillars of safety. About two years ago, the Roaring Fork schools invested in a school safety and security officer. Dustin Garing came to us, former law enforcement. Um he now leads and make sure that our practices are aligned to these five pillars of school safety. It has to do certainly with school relationships, um preventative work, social emotional well-being programs, education, partnerships like school-based mental health. Then it moves into some technical tactical things like secure entries. Um in the last bond that we passed in 2015, we redid all of our entries to all of our schools so that we had double doors. Um we're able to have kind of best practice evidence-based secure entries and exits. Um there's a number of different things that we do and and our safety and security coordinator makes sure that we're our practices are being implemented um in our safety forms that we had two years ago and we have phenomenal relationships with local law enforcement in uh city of Glowman Springs, town of Carbondale, town of Salt. Um every time we talk to the chiefs and say, you know, what are we not doing well? And we we are continually refining and implementing

things. I would say our our biggest vulnerability um and most of the time the chiefs the chiefs have um agree with this is our high school open campuses. I would say I I think I can firmly say we are doing everything reasonably possible to keep our schools safe except for that. And that is something that's going to be a culture shift and it's tricky. It's going to we're going to need to change staffing. Um we have to think differently about our bell schedules, about how our schools run. They were not built to have lunch at I mean our lunchroom our lunchroom at Glwood Springs High School I think can seat like 150 kids. Um so that is that's I think when I think of school safety that's the big piece that's still sticky. Um that feels like we don't have a plan and a way to hold and stay accountable. Um we're still talking about it. We're still working on it and trying to figure out what those barriers are. Um we'll have a school safety forum January 27th where we'll share what we're doing around these five pillars, what our work looks like, where the gaps um strengths are, opportunities to do better, and then continually hear from families and kids on what where they're feeling unsafe. Um it I hope that answers a little bit, but it's it's definitely a moving target. It's um it continues to feel very dynamic. It is very scary. It seems one of those very strange things that we have to invest in all these ways and think about our schools in these ways. Um we have incredible partnerships in the district with law enforcement, with nonprofits. Um yeah,

and I would say um reporting directly from students has been really helpful with our safe to tell system when students hear from other peers how they're feeling and just in anticipation. That's been a really helpful strategy to get ahead of it, too. like being able to have students disclose in an anonymous way so that they feel comfortable in making sure. Thanks. Thank you. Um, Mayor Prom Solinski,

thank you. This is a little anecdotal, but um, you know, I personally one thing that really helps with my mental health is physical activity. And so I just I um recently started working with a pre-olgiate program. One of one of the young ladies that I was talking with, she was talking about how she's going to have to give up some of her extracurriculars because she's having a hard time keeping academics and I'm like, I'm only with them for like just 30 minutes and so it's such a great Are there tutoring? What what sort of support is around that? because I feel like that balance is really important and I would love to as kind of an adult adviser help be able to gear towards that and I'm just wondering if that's part of that whole mental health kind of policy or approach and if you could just like expand on that just a little bit for me.

For sure. I'll let me I know Kelly can speak to this as well. First of all, thank you for being involved in Precolia. It's such an amazing program and it takes a village to run that program. Yeah.

Um those mentorships are really powerful. Absolutely. Like you know physical activity is so important to social emotional well-being. Learning I mean especially in our elementary and middle schools those little guys after they come back from PE or an active recess are so much more ready to learn. Um we actually let our school like I would say K8 especially kindergarten through 8th grade there's a lot of autonomy in how our schools set up their schedules. We have recommendations on physical activity and and recess. Our schools really work hard to try to utilize every minute of every day. A lot of our elementary kids are having multiple recesses to get them outside, get them moving. Um, we have physical education at all our schools. It gets a lot harder at middle and high school to make sure that daily activity is happening because of exactly that. The academic expectations for kids,

um, the pressures they're on. We don't, you know, a graduation requirement. We do not require physical education every year. The kids don't have to take that many credits of PE. So I, you know, I definitely can't stand here and say every kid's getting PE every day, especially not at the high schools. And um it's tricky. It's a tricky balance to try to make it all work for kids.

I might answer it differently just from the lens of like outside of the school and with how we work with families in in the community. I think the tutoring piece has been a challenge and there's been a lot of barriers to that one because of the cost and the availability of tutors in the area. I think when I first started 10 years ago, we had like a massive list of at least 100 tutors that we could call on and that's literally down to maybe five. So, the availability and just like the access piece has been really hard. Um, and I think for athletics, you know, the factor of like academics is one thing and it's also like again affordability. Like most of families and our students like they would want to play in the private clubs in the private league and that's still really expensive and then our schools do a really good job of athletics but they're limited as well right because of funding and staffing and all those things. So I think there's still a lot of um factors in there that limit that make it really hard for students to decide like

do I can I do academics well and are something that I'm really interested in. So I think it's a it's a little bit of everything. Yeah. Okay. I'm just sitting here thinking, all right, have to come up with a nonprofit that provides tutoring because I think that's really important. Councelor Smith, thank you. I appreciated the exchange you and Councelor Townsley had about safety in general, school safety in general. Um, and and my attention was caught that you leaped right to the open campus question. What do you project would be safer about not having open campus? Is it avoiding bullying or is it some other kinds of dangers?

Great. You know, it's really about managing who's in buildings. Like, do we know everybody in the building? Um, you know, Glennwood Springs High School was built as a very open, airy, there's lots of doors in and out, and it's really hard for us to manage those. And for safe and secure schools, I mean, if you look at some of the newer front range schools, they look like prisons. Um, they are fenced. You can't often even figure out how to get in there. That is not how our schools were built. They were built in a different day period. At lunchtime, if you just kind of walk around Glowen Springs High School, you will see lots of movement. Um, I mean, and the staff has we've got teachers out on either sides of the building monitoring kids in and out. Our kids here tend to be very polite. if they're standing by a door and they see someone outside who smiles at them, they're going to open that door. And we train them and we try to explain to them, don't do that. Um, but it's very hard when we do have these open campuses and kids are accustomed to moving in and out, running out to their vehicle to grab something, coming back. Um, it it would need to be a real change in culture. What we what we would need to do is really shut down all traffic to those double doors that are consistently monitored. Um, and each of our high school campuses has different challenges when it comes to that. Um, I mean, our safety and security systems, we can shut, you know, we can lock all the doors, we can do all that. We have cameras, we have all those sorts of things. Um, it's really around staffing and culture, but the the risk to your to get back to your question, the risk is really about who's in the building and who's here and should they be here?

Um, and do we have eyes on everybody in the building?

Thank you. That's very helpful. was a little different from what prompted me to ask the question because um as we discussed earlier, watching for opportunities where the city and the school district can team up where on things that they're already doing, they're already part of city services. Coincidentally, earlier this week, transportation commission was talking about safety and hazard locations for bicycles and pedestrians around town. And it actually went beyond the bike share discussion, just kind of everywhere. And one of the topics that got a lot of discussion is the passageway to the city market lunchroom and crossing a very busy state highway twice to get your lunch. Uh that's not what you just highlighted as a safety issue, but um I'll just mention that that our commission is bringing recommendations here eventually about that among other locations that might be a safer place for kids to go.

Oh, absolutely. Like Yeah. I mean, the the the researchbased vulnerability is about who's in the building, but I also do not love that kids are running across the street, hopping in their cars, trying to get to Starbucks really fast, driving back, um, you know, all in this very short 30-minute per or trying to run home and get lunch or get something, you know, that that is not ideal for putting more teenagers on the road right in the middle of the day um, with a very tight time frame. So, I yeah, I think there's there's a lot of factors that don't make an open campus ideal. um and and are a big shift that we need to tackle.

But even if you don't make that shift or until you do um there may that may be one little contribution the city can ultimately do is improving that crossing at for at 15th in Grand. All right. Thank you. If I see uh no more questions, we'll ask the public quick they have any comments on this? I see none. uh bring it back to council and I think the uh message is clear. They are looking for funding which is great. Um no problem. Um entertaining a motion. Mayor Pro Tim Solinsky. I would like to move that we approve the request um of $160,000 to support uh mental health facilities in our schools.

Okay. Thank you. Do we have a motion to approve and councelor Wymer? Happy to second. And a happy second. Any discussion on our end? See none. We'll call for the question. Oh, councelor Townsley. Do we need to include in motion that these funds are coming out of the alcohol and tobacco funds? Oh, that's probably a good idea. Okay. Thanks for pointing that out. I would like to amend my motion that the funds to support this contribution come from our um marijuana and uh tobacco funds. Excellent. I will amend my second

and an amended second. Everybody clear in what we're doing? Great. Any discussion? Seeing none, I'll call for the question. It wasn't wasn't quite quick enough. Was it a question or a comment? It's a comment for discussion before we vote. Don't show the vote yet. Let's let's turn it off.

Yeah. Cancel it off and we'll go. Councelor Small. So, in light of from my perspective, in light of the enrollment being down roughly 6% across all of the schools, the city's revenue being down approximately four to 6% for 2025, um the funding greater than our funding from last year is another one of those number swings that I think is a very big swing. And I I would I would want everybody to recognize that in coming years the money is not going to be there the way it has in the past. And we all need to be preparing for that right now.

Thank you, Councelor Small. And I I I'm trying to remember, but I think we said the same thing last year when you ask for funding that that at some point it'll dry up just it might not be here forever. But like councelor Shack just said in the work session, if we can help, I I certainly think we should help. So with that, I'll call the question.

Yes, Councelor Townsley. Yes, Mayor Prom Zalinski. Yes, Mayor Dame. Yes, Councelor Wymer. No, Councelor Schmall. Yes, Councelor Smith. Yes, Councelor Shaker. It passes 61. Thank you, Ryan. Thank you so much for being here and any update is a welcome update. So, please

Yeah. Excellent. Moving on. Item eight tonight, Canyon Vista financial contribution. Good evening, council. Watkins Fulgrey, senior planner. Thank you all for your time and attention tonight. Um, Cananan Vista, as you all know, is an 80UN affordable housing project that's in between Highway 6 and Donigan Road. This is a funding request, so I don't have a lot to to say to you guys. Um, but I want to first describe the funding request and then get into some of the other commitments that we have. Um and then kind of talk about um the the fund balance because this is from our workforce housing fund. Uh we do also have the representative from the developers. They're here. Um and so they will of course talk about the this funding request in their own words. Um but to try to put it simply, this funding request is there's two parts to it. The first is pretty straightforward. The first part is that it's a $785,000 ask. Um, and if you remember from September 4th when this was also discussed, that's the same 785,000. At that time, you guys instructed him to, um, look for other sources of funding and then perhaps come back. So, he's he's coming he's come back. Now, the second part that's a little more complicated is that on September 4th, um you council uh agreed to backfill the fees, the the the permit fees and the system improvement fees from the workforce housing fund, the 2C fund. So, the request tonight is to instead of backfilling the fees um that you guys agreed to do to contribute that money toward the project. And so, that takes away the back filling. Obviously, that leaves a little bit of a hole for the um where the fees would would go. Um so that's that that's the ask.

How much is that? Those fees were $730,000 approximately. Thank you.

Um so right now what's committed is 2.3 million. So that's uh 785,000* 2 that was agreed in 2024 and then the 730,000 I just mentioned. So, with this request for another 785,000, um, that brings it to about 3.1 million and I'm assuming that you guys are going to have some interest in at least discussing doing the backfilling of the fees regardless of how this goes tonight. So, this would rise to about 3.8 million um, if you do honor both of the asks tonight and also backfill the fees. I know that's a little bit complicated, so we can happy to go back over these numbers if we need to. So, if it ends up being a $3.8 million contribution from the city, the uh contribution per unit, because that's a useful way to compare these kinds of projects, um would be about $29,000 a unit. Nope, excuse me, that's the current that's the current at the current level. So, at 3.8 million, that's about $48,000 a unit. Apologize.

How did you figure that out by year? Sorry to interrupt, but yeah, that's 3.8 million divided by 80 80 units. So that's four 48,000 per unit. And I can give you some comparisons too for some recent projects too. Um at the Benedict uh 34 unit senior affordable housing project um we did wave the fees for that one. And so that was a subsidy from the city of 10,600 per unit. The mobile home park here in town that we committed $ 1.5 million to this year. um that that's 40 units and so that's about $37,000 per unit over there. Okay, thank you.

So, do we have the money for it? I think you're asking or going to be asking. Uh we do, but if it all had to be drawn from 2026, then we don't. So, we are we would be talking about spreading this over 2026 and 2027. So, um, in 2027 without this current request, if you denied all of these requests, we'd be looking at a balance of about 2.1 million. Uh, if you honor the request and backfilled the fees exactly as has been requested, we'd be looking at a balance in 2027 of about 638,000 in the workforce housing fund. That's a lot of numbers. I'm happy to repeat them back and discuss them as we need. Please repeat back the 26 number if left over in the account for 26 or in the funds. Sorry.

Yeah. And I don't think I told you 26. So Oh, I didn't think so. Yeah. 2026 we will have projected about 829,000 left over. And and 27 one more time. 27 if we if you do not do any of these requests tonight, that'd be 2.1 million left over. And if we do all the requests, 638,000. 638. Okay, great. Thank you. Uh Watkins, Mayor Prom Solinsky, first question. Yeah, one more clarifying question. The request today is that waving the fees and contributing that is that like a or is it I just need clarification on I'm not sure exactly what you're asking.

Yes, absolutely. So, yes, waving the fees and instead of taking that money that would backfill the fees, contributing that toward as well to toward the project as well. So in actuality it's more than the 3.8 because it's the back fill plus the fees or is there an additional ask? 3 3.8 would be total if you that's that's what I didn't understand totally. Thank you.

Thank you. Um since we're out of questions we'll go to uh council towns. just, you know, before we even get into other main questions, there was a piece the budget was on here, but we're referring back to the 2C budget as of July 1st. Last time he was here, we' gotten a kind of an updated budget that was like September or something, and I've got those numbers here, but then some of the numbers you're giving us, is there a third one that's more accurate than September as far as what's in that that we could get a hold of at some point? Yes. Um, would you like to put it on the screen or something? Yeah, that'd be great.

Yep. Let me share the screen here. Um, this is going to be accurate as of de uh October 31st. I can make it a little bit bigger than that. And if you could just forward that to us for our records at some point, that would be great.

Sure. Sure. Yep. So, um, these numbers are two of the ones you want to be looking at. These are the projected funds at the end of the year. So, uh 2026 here and then 27 here. Uh this would be if this would be with all the the contributions that have been um decided upon um but not uh doing any of the ones that are requested tonight. Could you pull that down for all the programs and funding levels? Um I think you've got it all here. These are the these are the programs.

I'm sorry. The the 2.1 million for 27 includes the two the 2.3 million contribution the the previous ask. Yes, sir. And that's the balance we'd have if we don't fund the other one. Oh god, whatever it is. 1.7. That's right. Okay. Gallons are small. Oh, were you done? Are we done? I'm done for now.

I'm not I'm not understanding the numbers. I had it in my head that had we had we committed to the full ask at the last meeting that that would have about left us at a zero balance or a very small balance for 2026. And that's not what I'm seeing here. Right. You're seeing 829,000. So, it's not a small balance. Um, and that that 2026 number won't be impacted by well, depending how you structure this, but um if you were to honor all the requests that are being made tonight um and took it out of 27's budget, 2026 wouldn't change. So, we would still have, you know, an amount that's that's healthy enough to um to survive if the the forecasts aren't met for the the fund balances and and to still honor all our commitments that we have.

Councelor Towns, you want you want to go? Oh, I just turned you off. So, I do do it again, please. So, the 785 there in 26. One second. We got it. There you go. The 785 is the what we had previously voted on. The 730 is the back fill that was also previously that was also previously done. But now when we go over to 2027, we're still looking at another 1.5 basically two two 700 pieces there. One would be the additional ask of of getting that money and then we're also filling the back we're still filling the back fill of everything else that was there. So that's where you drop down to the 600,000. And that's what you're seeing now. Yes, sir.

There they are. Thanks. You good for now? Good. Okay. Excellent. Council Shack. So I also have a question. Um down payment assistance. What will happen with that funding? It's not a line item. And also I've heard that there's a concern from 2C about a reserve or anticipation of future mobile home park assistance what isn't in there. So what is likely to happen to that 638,000 if those items are entered in and to what amounts why aren't they?

So for the first part down payment assistance uh we have a grant for that. So we the city fronts the money. We have to pay our own money at first, but then we we get reimbursed by the state. So that's why it shows zero for all of these. And when does that term that end at some point? It does end in 2026. And how much have we been using at this point? Um we have used everything that they'll give us for this year. Um and so we have another trench of money coming next year. For what amount each year? Um it is for $360,000 total. Um so 180,000 per year. was has 2C made a decision that they don't want to continue that anymore with their own funds. The decision is you mean

workforce? Yes. The decision has not been made yet on that. Okay. So, that's still up in the air and like I say, there's no mobile home park reserve. So, I have concerns about the workforce housing commission lining out what their goals are for the next three to five years without those items in there. and the reserves. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Smith.

Thank you. Um I have some what might be called substantive questions for a little later, but but I have another question kind of about the procedure here. Um, why is this new request being characterized as moving the already approved fee backfill to a grant and then apparently still backfilling the fees somehow? Why why aren't we just staying with that already approved act the fees and simply asking for another grant? What what's what's the significance of this particular sequence? That's a great question to ask the developer when he comes up here. But the reason um the reason has to do with the kind of the tax financing on the back end. It allows them to count if it's a contribution. If they pay the fees and then we pay them the money, there's a way that they can account for that that allows them more of a tax credit basis.

Oh, there was an answer. Thank you. But you're up next. Okay. May I approach? So I apologize if I'm just being particularly dense. So you said if they pay the fills pay the fees and then So are we waving fees? We we are waving fees. Um currently we agreed to wave fees and then backfill it. But now we're talking so there would be no fee waving

there. We would essentially be waving the fees. Um if if you want the full story, they would actually pay the fees and then we would pay them back for those fees and then this this would be this would be an additional $730,000 contribution. It's a tax thing in addition paying them back for the fees. I'm just I I think I'm struggling. I'm sorry. Understandably so. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So they're So I think I understand. So they're going to pay the fees, but we're going to pay them back for the fees and we're going to give them additional money. Yes. And Okay.

So the simplest way to think about it from the city's perspective is that we are waving the fees and also giving them that amount of fees as a contribution toward the project. But but yet we backfill the fee once. And so that's that's a question that you all will Yep. I'll ask. Yeah. Yeah. I think I'm Thank you. I appreciate. Okay. Any other questions? No. We'll see none. Um, thank you, Watkins. Would the uh applicant care to come forward? State your name for the record.

Hi, Mayor Daven. Council, council members, my name is Kyle. I work for cozy. We were developer of the project. So I'll just say that we did expect that the council would quickly uh recognize the this complexity and that we wouldn't be able to so I have the same presentation that we have given in the past uh with some notes just to show what has happened since September. Um, if I could move through you guys. Was it here?

I just got the one you sent me a second ago. So, it'll be that's a separate document that if just getting through some of the updates, we can look at briefly despond. only if it's useful but I did send it so

so council has has given us a lot of time so we will try and be as fast as possible um I think the reason to go through an update is just because we were told to go to work and to find other sources of funds and and we have done that and the project you know is projects do has evolved and there have been additional costs which have been incurred and and different um requirements from uh the other partner financing partners that have increased the cost of the project. Um so and it's also to say uh all the project assumptions remain the same in terms of the program for the site which is a priority for us to to to maintain it. Uh you know we have all the same partners many of whom are local um the we've have the same service delivery group with the west um West Mountain Regional Health Alliance who we who we've consummated an agreement for services with. So the project did begin as 131 units. It had this third tier, you know, and uh with parking underneath these two north or that building at the north, it wasn't a fit in terms of the uh what worked for that area from the city's perspective. [clears throat] But at that point, we didn't have uh city money or greenhouse gas reduction fund money. So it was redesigned to be this net zero uh emissions project to qualify for these greenhouse gas funds. Um, and also for the city's Prop 2C money, that is the 1.57 million that was uh formally committed in June June of 2024. Uh, and so those funds are still uh still showing up in this budget uh the city budget. Um, so the 80 units was less dense, but then the this is chronology, the greenhouse gas reduction funds were cancelled by the current administration.

So the project then went to raise funds to replace those funds. U and so this is I've just added these updates. These pages are unchanged except um for the red text. So we are holding currently the 1.5 million from Colorado Health Foundation. Our solar tax base is has been confirmed at each time we've revised it to uh incrementally increase the what funding is available through solar tax credits. Um Garfield County that uh tax exemption was approved. The city fee wavers were granted by council or to back this city fee wavers were actually became a backfill through prop 2C which is granted by council in September. Uh the 785,000 from 2027 is the subject of today's conversation. Uh our we have a total of 841,000 of the solar tax credits. Uh same as same as we were presenting in in September. uh our fellow home loan bank uh application for 1.5 million is still pending. We haven't uh the updates haven't been promising in terms of our likelihood to receive those funds, but we will get a deter receive a termination within probably next six weeks. Uh our Colorado uh DO fund application for 1.6 million actually was funded at 3.5 million. So that was a significant improvement in the sources available to the project and there's a story to how that was that came to be. Um uh the 25 vouchers that we were aiming to have through Garfield County uh ended up being 20. So we had a target of about 1.6 million of additional debt that the project could support with 25 vouchers and we achieved about 1.1 million of that. We had um Aspen Core. This just says clear. Aspen Core uh is the energy

is the foundation that provides energy related grants to housing and single family homeowners. A lot of different types of applicants. So we projected 250. We got 100. They just confirmed that uh this past week. Um, so this December today is uh it is $3.1 million total, which is a lot. Um, u and and the process I say I've been watching. Yeah, the the process for this 730,000 is kind of confusing. It has to do with the tax credit rules and that if we pay the city fees, they it qualifies as basis. And I don't want to get too into the mechanics of it. Uh it's it's part of it's part of the accounting in the tax credit world that basis is king. You know, we we try and uh be competitive for the most tax credits that a project can receive as a deeply affordable project. Um and then the other pieces for today is this 270 sorry the 2027 funding request of the 285,000 or 785,000. Uh we have recently made an additional application to Chavis concessionary debt program. U I think the amount of that award will depend on a lot of things. So I'll keep going here. And so this summary is a very busy document. Um but it shows I'm highlighting what what the prompt 2C funding uh projected is. The reason we're here today is because we can close. We have we're now within range of closing within 60 days based on some of these changes that have happened uh in our pursuit of other funding. Um, so the total contribution of the city is

3.1 million approximately that we're requesting today. The 3.8 million is because there's a reinvestment of the proceeds that are generated by our paying the fees after we're after we receive the Prop 2C money. But I have to push any conversation of that to the end and just focus on it. Is a $3.1 million funding, which is which is a large amount to ask. Uh why is additional funding needed? I just wanted to call out that our hard costs since we last spoke have increased $ three and a half million dollars. Um we're still working towards improving that number. Some of it's attributable to Davis Bacon. Some the final uh environmental reports that came back in terms of what our obligations are regards to asbestos and soils. Um uh the different there there are certain contaminants in the soil that require more uh robust practices about how we export it. And then the retaining walls and site utilities, we we just really drilled down a lot of the subject matter and have a number now that that works to build. Uh but it has that costs have gone up. The biggest leap was the Davis bacon that represents 70% of this increase. Um and then soft costs have increased. We had to increase our interest reserve just to address risk um and some certain financing fees. Uh other adjustments just to call them out is our senior debt did reduce in terms of how much senior debt we would support. Uh our state 4% tax credits they increase based on total cost of the project. Those increased 1.8 million. The deferred development fee was another source of three of 1.35 million which the project Bates vouchers uh weren't a major improvement to the budget but they are a major improvement to the long-term health of the project to have 20 vouchered units at at those rents are going to create a much more sustainable

project. um the city city loan incentives that were agreed to apply to any of the city's um funds that would be committed and you know then our rents uh you know again we're building a project that has an average of 900 square f feet per unit. It's a it there are 55 of the apartments are two and three bedrooms with another 20 of the apartments are onebedrooms that are 700 square feet. Those are generously sized apartments versus the Benedict which is like all 500 square feet apartments. So our price per square foot versus the Benedict and I am not adversarial with Benedict at all. We're in the same side of this, right? But we have a fairly costefficient project if you look at that we are housing families to the vast majority of these units. The one bedrooms are large enough to house a family. And of course, the number of two and three bed bedrooms. U and the average rent paid by the families across all these the weighted averages the $1,300. Uh so again, the Meadows is we have the same amenity package as the Meadows. We don't have a pool. So that without the pool, but we have elevators and they have no elevators. So rents there for a two bed 3200. Ours range from 950 to,900. Um, so and I just say again, we're trying to build a high quality product. Uh, we don't we don't strip it for parts and get down to where, you know, it's just hallway into your room. We want we want the amenities to be inviting. We want to create a sense of culture and desire for families to stay. Uh, so these are apartments with the sim very similar affordability levels that we've completed uh just in the past 18 months. You know, this is community room. Uh, this is this is community room here. Uh, playground. These are our fitness rooms. Our launchpad is uh those are studios, but those are it's formerly homeless youth. This is what we built. We did get an award recently for the launchpad. Uh and so

uh right, we're uh so we can answer any other questions in terms of why we're here and what uh what we're trying to accomplish. you know, feels like a a sales pitch and and that's what it is. We're trying to close this deal. We think we can do it in 60 days with these dollars. We're welcome, you know, can uh uh if the funds come with uh requirements in order to for them to be released, we're welcome any any optionality with the city to to bring these to bring what is a would be a massive investment by the city.

Thank you. Yes, sir. Council Towns,

um numerous questions here for you. Um, so you know, you say your ask today is for a 3.1. I think we're to ask a 3.8 because we don't want to leave our back fill unfilled. So, I think we should work with a 3.8 figure. Um, last time you were here, councelor Small asked you if we gave you the money, how certain were you that you could move forward? And I think you said it was like 80 to 85%. in looking at that and so now you're back wanting not only that money but another 750,000 on top of that and now you're really certain that you can get it to the finish line and I would just you know how why why should we believe you now would be my question there so yep we uh in September it there was a lot lot of things that were different about the project in September. Um, and had we received the funding we needed at that time before we had to go out for the additional vouchers, etc., timing is such a major factor with this with these projects. Um, because time changes things and usually not for the better. Um, so yeah, we I think at that time uh so if we were so the the back filling of fees. We we approach I think at the time we thought of the fees as being el the project as being eligible for a fee waiver based on its deeply affordable and the municipal code. So some of what we had discussed leading up to it was okay well these fees project might be eligible for the fee waivers but really the fees benefit the project because it we do get tax credits for paying those fees. So the thought of the fees being back and paid

through the 2C fund was beneficial and great. It was a it was a significant improvement to for the budget. Um because we're getting roughly $620,000 of tax credits for routing the the 2C funds through the project to pay the fees because we I guess I'm more worried about what our costs were versus what you say you're doing for tax. I mean, the bottom line to us is what is it going to cost us? Yeah. So, no matter how you move the shells around, that doesn't really, at least for me, it doesn't affect my my deciding on there. I'm just curious as to, you know, why should you why should you be be believed? Yeah.

Um, well, we would we have postponed this meeting, this request to to be here uh on a couple occasions because we knew we couldn't uh close within 60 days. We see more than one path to doing that in 60 days today. We see multiple paths. It requires uh beyond the city's contribution. We are we're talking with the different stakeholders, you know, folks that are a part of this project. And I don't want to get too into too much detail uh because everyone looks at this project, folks that are the city and all the other folks that are being asked to participate in in various roles um are looking at and saying, "What do you really need?" Right? What do you really need to close this? There's there's a lot of folks that want to see it close and they're they have a stake in it, right? They're [clears throat] they have a return associated with their participation. I'm being very vague here, but I just I'm trying to be careful about our conversations with those those folks. But what I'm trying to say is we don't have this narrow, you know, hoop that we can if we if everything goes right, we'll close. We see a several different uh things lining up to close within 60 days of if if the city were to make this award because the city is a major player in making that type of contribution. It's unprecedented, right? Um it's a tough place to build. You know, we're building a type of project that, you know, it's a tough tough type of project to build in and especially in this location. So, so why should we be believed today? Because we wouldn't we're not here for any other reason than we see multiple ways to close within 60 days. And we have an investor and debt

partner who's really waiting to see the outcome of our so the they're waiting to see the outcome of this and one other that 3.5 million has to be uh approved by the state housing board on Tuesday. We again I can only say so much about that but we we think there's a very good chance that will be finalized. uh odds are very good that it will be and so if things start to go right uh or if things don't not everything has to go right for us to close in 60 days with this commitment from the city uh I think you're you're talking about it's a huge difference maker all the other players that I'm talking about potentially contributing to making this happen they don't have the weight the city has in terms of increasing the likelihood that it closes with with this type of commitment.

So, I guess um a question on that too is is referring to getting it closed versus getting it built. And so, we closed something. I think we closed something over at the confluence here not long ago and then they came back to us for more money and said, "Okay, and this has nothing to do with you, but the council's left in position of, okay, we approved something, we got it started, and now we're on the hook for more money because you can't finish it." And again, I think you were asked last time you were here, have you, you know, dealt with the builders and the mountains, the extra cost and everything like that? You assured us that you were and you had and you taking those things into consideration and now you're back going, the cost came in higher. Our builders are giving us higher numbers. So getting you closed is certainly one goal. You know, I love the project. I think it's a great project, but when we get it closed, then can you get it built without coming back to us for more money? And that I'm very very uncertain of right now from what I've heard so far. And I I do have a couple other questions that there may be for staff. The money that we committed in 2014, are we at a Taber issue now once we go into 2026 with that?

You mean 2024? 24, right? I don't think we had a Taber issue. And and Councelor Townsley, the way you described it, I think is exactly right. We agreed to Let's just kind of round off in round numbers. $750,000 in 24, $750,000 in 25. We're in for that and we've done that. The ask was then another $750ish,000 plus a waiver of fees of $750,000. So that's where we get to the $3.1 million that he's talking about. No Taber problem so far, but waving that three waving those fees, we still want those fees paid. We don't want all that out of there. So you're still at 3.8. Absolutely. How you get to the 3.8 And I don't think that we should not backfill the fees. Exactly.

The Taber issue comes in when we decide that we can't afford all of this in 2026. Therefore, we want to push some of this contribution into 2027. Well, at that point, we do have a taper issue in that you guys cannot agree to take a debt in a fiscal year further than the one ahead of us now. So in theory, a council, whether it's you guys or somebody else, could turn around in 2026, a year from now, and unwind the balance of the contribution that we were going to make in 2027. And then the last question, then I'll turn it because I'm sure everybody else has questions, too. When I went back and relisted to the meeting from last time and reread your your previous proposals, I'm not sure if I if I got this wrong, but at the end of 15 years, does this project get turned over to Garfield County Housing Authority?

Yes. And how much money is Garfield County, other than waving $870,000 of use tax, how much more are they putting into the project?

So, they're putting in 20 project based vouchers. Uh the annual revenue I can get you the annual revenue number for that fairly quickly. Um, I guess I guess our question is if we're putting in a massive amount of money here, at least for our city budget, and then 15 years from now, we give the project to the Garfield County, I don't know that maybe maybe there's some accounting or some other things there that we need to look at or maybe I'm missing something. So, I would I would bring that up for council to look at. All right. If there's answers to that, please. This is a lot of this is newer to me. Thank you.

Fair question. council. So I understand roughly the the idea behind not waving fees for accounting purposes. I guess Steve are there some accounting ramifications for us whether that's a fee in lie or whether it's actually a donation or how we spend the money. Is there some taxing ac uh consideration for us?

Not really. The way that the money flows through would give them an advantage to get additional tax credits. It wouldn't affect us other than making our finance director's job a little bit more difficult because she got more journal entries to deal with. Yeah. But it but not not tax entry journals journal entries. Um so that's that is $60,000. is did I hear it right? $60,000 or $600,000 worth of credits almost the value of of what we're getting. They're they get to

tax advantage of that which is if you stand back and think about tax credits and tax tax money that's going into this thing. If I were a tax accountant, my head would explode. uh I want to try to figure out how to do this because it's a wonderful well yeah money maker

especially since most of it's not real money anyway. Um I I share your concern Dave about confidence. Um, I'd like you to explain to me how all of a sudden Davis Bacon became a big cost issue because in my experience, you can't hire anybody in this town for Davis Bacon wage. They're going to be more expensive than Davis Bacon. That's correct.

So, but you listed Davis Bacon as a as a big cost impact. So, is it the administrative cost of Davis Bacon? Because it I can't If if it's the actual wage base, then you had a bad estimate to begin with.

Those are fair points. So, just to answer your first question, so I have personally been involved all the projects that I put on the screen. I've been involved with them since it was dirt and we said, "How are we going to build? What are we going to build?" And I've I've seen them through that entire process. So when I tell you I'm confident we can build this at quality at the number we're proposing wouldn't be saying that unless I had very high confidence that that would happen. That's still not to say others couldn't differ and take a different view of what we're going to of what the risks are. Um but but we're we're fairly experienced and have been doing this a good amount of time. But the um Davis Bacon, it's a fair point. when we looked at the Davis Bacon premium. I think that's something we're still digging into with the contractor. This is a recorded meeting and so I wouldn't want to express how we think about these goings on with the contractor uh in too blunt of terms but you can imagine right and there is a premium there's a there are contractors who can handle the Davis Bacon administrative reporting piece and if they can't you don't want them on the job and so you might have a framer that's building it out as peace meal they just got guys like labor ready guys that you can pay based on the number of pieces they pull off the stack and install during framing. Well, that that type of framer is not going to be Davis Bacon type. They're going to have to direct employ these folks. They have to know about them. There's information in terms of section three compliance that we have to meet. And so you're you're not necessarily replacing everyone that's involved with the project, but you're taking a harder look at how'd you price it, who do you have, what staff hours do you have allocated to it, or can you do it right? Because we have projects where you get to the end or mid- project, you know, when you're twisted arms saying, "We need your Davis Baker reporting." HUD's, you know, up

our nose about it. they're going to withhold their some sometimes we have HUD uh federal money that's withheld if we don't we're not don't stay current with that reporting so it's a complicated world you know to wrangle all this information and be presenting it on a timely basis then have it all at the end of the project tied up so you can you can move forward and close out the project. Um, so that's a big part of it is just making sure you're confident that the the subs who you had priced into that original bid can deliver Davis Bacon reporting because we when we first sent the bid out, Davis Bacon was we put all the Davis Bacon in there. We said, but we realized that we [clears throat] had some uh we realized we weren't going to have to do it. Uh, and so it was in part of the conversation from the very beginning. didn't surprise anyone, but I will say we might have done better to not have to bring it back in because they priced it all without Davis Bacon. Then they had to go back to those subs, start reshuffleling the deck in terms of who's a part of the project. So, I'm admitting that that was an inefficient process, but it came about due to the timing of CDOH first not not quite being able to fund our request and so then we had to go for the vouchers that brought Davis Bacon in and then CDH did fund our request in the end. So that could have worked out timing time of that could have worked out better analogy. U I don't know if tell me if I'm not answering the question. I I am doing my best.

So I maybe missed part of the projectbased vouchers. That's a commitment by some other agency to to pay rent on a certain number of these units.

Yes. And I didn't mean to gloss that over, but that's why we're have to do the Davis Bacon is because if you have only uh only eight vouchers, you can have up to eight vouchers and that doesn't trigger that Davis Bacon requirement. Once you have nine or more, you have to do Davis Bacon wage reporting. And it's just the way the federal government says if we're supporting the project with our resources, we want this additional layer of compliance to make sure that because there are markets where people get taken advantage of. the government wants to be putting their money into projects that's supporting, you know, equity for people for working-class people. And so it's just a rule and uh and we we tripped it by increasing the vouchers on this project.

Okay. And then I guess one other clarification from my perspective. Um, as I understand the proposal still has only 20 of the 80 units that are Glenwood resident preferred and but we can't really say that we're trying to we're trying to somehow prioritize Glenwood employees, Glennwood people who work in Glennwood Springs but going round about to do That's right, 20 units. Uh, and the reason that we have to do that in a kind of roundabout way and can't just say they shall work and live in Glenwood is that we would run a foul of the Fair Housing Act when we do that. And so we have to try to be more creative and find um, you know, things like priority lists and and um, you know, preferences to try to not uh, run a PAL federal often.

Okay, I do have it right then. And in that case, our investment per unit, it should be by 20, not by 80, which makes it $190,000 per unit that we're investing in this other than the whatever the affordability is of the rest of the 60 units. Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Councelor Smith.

Thank you. I have a collection of questions and they might sound a little jumbled, but I'll try to make them make sense. Um, some of them will, I think, end up being directed at least in part to staff if and when that's appropriate. But Kyle, your your presentation, I have a handful. Um, I'm terribly impressed with the complexity of this project and your diligence in sorting it all out. I mean, you going to that level of work for a good purpose, good public purpose as different from just for investor profit. So, that that gets my attention and thank you for being so diligent. Um, and I because you've been digging into these details, I think you probably have answers to some of these questions. Um, this is one that I'll try for you, but may end up going back to staff. At a time before I came to serve here, there were some preliminary approvals for funding for the project. And there were there was, as you just mentioned in your summary tonight, there was an original design. It had more units in it. 131 was originally proposed. Is dropping that from 131 to 80 a part of the problem here?

Yes. So if you had more units, you could get more tenants playing paying even low even artificially low rents that would help you make the numbers work.

Well, I I appreciate you you mentioning it. The reason we bring it up, it's not a problem, but it is part of how the this the project was structured um with less reliance on public funding support in its original iteration. It was changed to meet some of the priorities both of Chaffa and the city. Um and so that has created some of the dynamics that we're trying to solve for now. Okay, thank you. Um, you mentioned in several handful of instances some tax benefits, solar credits, um, some some other tax uh, exemptions. Uh, that was from the county. But any of these that are federal, solar tax credits for one,

um the the accounting benefit you have from from this fee waiver versus just a grant, are are those federal benefits stable? Um tax law changed again not long ago in Congress. Uh the solar the net zero grants just disappeared. Um, are the ones that you're still working with going to be there?

Yeah, this administration has uh shown uh and it's it's you you could you'd have to acknowledge that there is some unpredictability with how policy has worked, you know, in the past year. uh but it's the LITC uh allocation to states was increased. The rules around the 4% bond allocation were uh relaxed to allow more projects to qualify for funding through the private activity bond. So through the big beautiful bill they this the administration did show an interest in expanding the tax credit marketplace.

Thank you.

Some of the energy the this organization is not as supportive of energy related grants and incentives uh as offered to the federal government in the past. So the 45L credit uh has been cancelled in the last six months and so that had been a part of our funding and then solar tax credit is going to phase out more quickly than it had been slated to. So it creates some urgency with this particular program of the project to close sooner than later. We have to spend a certain percentage and I'm I'm not going to guess it. I I know what it is. I just don't want to say the wrong number. we have to we have to expense a certain amount of our solar budget before June 30th of 26 in order to retain our access to those credits which are a significant portion of our budget. So we also don't want to risk we want the project to be able to deliver of a fixed utility meaning a master meter setup so that because tenants get pushed out of pro of apartments for a lot of it doesn't take much to destabilize a low-inccome family. you know, a couple months of something not going quite right, healthcare, any you name it. And utilities can be part of that. If they're if they have kids at home that are leaving the windows open and they run up, you know, $500 utility bill for a few months in a row, that could be enough to to set them onto a path where they lose housing.

So, we want to be able to deliver this. And I don't want to make it sound like too good a people, right? If this is all we do, right? If you go to any developer, this is what they should be and probably are doing. So this is the space we reflect back these priorities because that's what makes us competitive to build this type of housing. So it's not just that we're a bunch of great people, right? We enjoy the competition element of trying to do something that's not simple. Um and and of course we feel good about it, right? Um but um so I do think that this current uh financing stack reflects what we understand to be reliable sources uh in the window of time we are expect to close. We haven't speculated with any Yeah. I mean

thank you uh to to one more time clarify the 3.8 versus $3.1 million total bill. From your perspective, the 3.1 is what allows you to close in 60 days. Is that correct? What we do about backfilling our fees is is more our concern than yours. Yeah. And I don't Yeah. I mean, it's you'd have to tell us what the impact is to the city. We can't say that, but for the impact of your budget, you need $3.1 million. We're thinking of it that way. Okay, great.

And we and we can represent how that how it flows. But you're still I think it's a fair point that council towns makes you that if the city's budget relies on that those dollars, you know, that's part of the decision, right?

Thank you. Um, building on councelor Schmall's insightful question about um, Glenwood worker preferred units and the complications there. Um, aside from the requirements or the limitations of fair housing laws and such, from your experience in projects like this or from whatever other insight you may have, how many of these ADU are going to end up being local workers? Well, whether they were set aside or not.

Yeah, I think Councilman Schmo makes a fair point. What I want to say is driving around understanding these mobile home and other types of non-traditional housing that uh exist in significant quantities right around this site. You it would be a obviously an improvement for a lot of those folks to move into one of these apartments. I don't want to say that's true of all them and most some of them seem to own their homes and so I don't understand that market that submarket that well. But what we do often see is folks moving from a local lower quality housing situation into our new buildings and they're really excited to do it. And because it's same school district, same transportation setup for the kids getting to and from uh they're it's a good fit. And I think we we they're some of the most grateful residents we have because they're like, "Oh god, this is so great. I I get to move half a block away and have this this living situation and have real permanence in it at the same time. So, um you know, all the same friend group and everything. So, we we do see that it's a big part of the conversations we have when during lease up is uh and sometimes it's a I'm probably saying too much here, but sometimes it's a apartment building with not a great land, which I'm not seeing a lot of that type of product nearby. So again, I couldn't say if folks in these current living situations nearby would consider this an improvement, but I will say almost every project we see a significant number of our applicants who are living in a local nearby apartment building where the landlord is just not taking care of things.

I don't think you're talking too much. I think I think these qualifi qualitative this considerations are really important. The the human experience involved is is a key part of this. So, thank you for those are some of the most grateful residents for adding that vocal vocally grateful. Yeah.

Also wanting to do a little bit of of the of the the mechanical side building on councelor's question or maybe maybe this is just not possible to answer, but under our 20 units preferred for local workers, we're kind of counting on getting 20 units for local workers. Are we likely to get more just because of practicality of things? Is your experience The best I can do is tell you stories about what we see. I I don't I don't want to make presumptions about how it will work for for a specific project.

Okay. That's fair enough. I knew it was a it was a long shot question, but thank you. Um my others I think you might have answers for, but I certainly think staff want to would have answers for. Is it okay to ask staff questions, too? Absolutely. Question time. Um, if the council were to go with this plan, the 3.8 million plan for shortand, is it necessarily so that the the backfill fees would come from 2C money or might it come from somewhere else? [clears throat]

In theory, you could probably back for those fees from the general fund. which doesn't really help the city one way or the other. It just it it addresses it feels like it addresses the concerns that councelor Shaper highlighted earlier that we've got other programs in the workforce housing world that might get crimped if we take too much money out of that fund. That's that is true. We also have ongoing operational needs in our general funds that we can't have crimped.

Thank you. Um the the this is another that requires a I think maybe a combination of conjecture and a comp combination of just straightforward zoning data. Can we anticipate what might happen on this site if this project does not succeed. Um factually speaking, no. Um what the zoning is is M1. So there's no minimum lot size. Um you could build theoretically as many units as you want except that's tempered by the requirement that you have to provide parking and provide landscaping and provide common open space and all those sorts of things. So, um, you know, if if if you're wondering if some another project could be built that's more dense, maybe um it would be difficult though. Uh, this project already involves quite a lot of engineering um and in creating some some walls to make sure that there's room for everything there. Um, so it's it's over three acres the site. Um, but it's kind of the right size for a multif family project that that makes use of all the space I would say. So under M1, it wouldn't even necessarily be housed.

That's right. It could it could have a slew of non-residential units that Okay. Well, thank you. Uh just before I came to service here, I sat in on a meeting. I think I've got the timing right, where this whole notion of having some of this city contribution come in the form of a loan instead of these various grants or fee wavers was just was put aside because of internal accounting difficulties. Do I remember that right? Yeah, I mean it does complicate our financial statement a little bit. Is it impossible?

No, it's not impossible. Um, thank you. That's all I can think of for now. Thank you, Mayor Prom Silinski. All right. So if all things go as intended and when do you anticipate the beginning the project and finishing the project?

So it's been day by day talking with um they've been waiting to see what the outcome of this meeting is and on Tuesday. Um so it would be easier to give an answer a week from today. Just best guess just shoot from the hip.

Well, we also have the seller who may be watching this and saying when are they telling me they're going to you know and so we're we do have a lot of timing. It's it's it's not funny but it is funny that everyone's looking at this being like when is this going to happen because folks have a lot at stake. Even the debt and equity folks who do this in as an big institution right they have they are supposed to put money to work, right? And they have CRA, they have like things that their organization needs to, you know, milestones they have to achieve each year. So, a lot of folks uh there's a lot of pressure on this current situation to to make good on a timing commitment that we would be making within the next week or two and to make good on and if I'm if I'm saying a date, I think different people could hear it different ways. So, we're saying 60 days because

because as of today, we're looking at scenarios that are much much fewer than 60 days or a stage closing. There's a lot of options to close in stages where certain monies are committed and and but you don't close on. So, there's there's ways to make sure that we meet everyone's timing requirements and and we got some really bright people and we're all talking through this weekly more you know, multiple times a week. Um, looking at how to make that happen. So, it's Sorry. No, no, no, no. It's all good. Keep going. It's probably more than enough said.

You said you said a lot and it's never enough, right? It's one of those things. The reason that I asked is, okay, so we're spending basically future money that we haven't earned yet. And so, I'm always like a little concerned about that concept. So I was wondering like how would this distribution go? You know, would it be done before 2027? So now we have to borrow money from other funds in the city to pay That's what I was kind of getting at.

So I don't know that we would have to borrow funds um from other parts of the city. It would tie up our Tucson funds I think entirely through 26. we would expose ourselves a little bit to the risk that our forecasts are not met in our accommodations tax. Yep. So that was one of my questions. We've built some, you know, room in for that. And I think that it would be unlikely that we would fall so far that we would have a problem with that, but it's not impossible. In which case, we would have to then do a due to due from loan from probably our general fund to shore that up. Okay. Yeah, thank you.

From the project perspective, lean would be June of 27. Okay, thank you, Council Ty. Um, two things. Let's go back to the the 20 units of preferred housing. Nothing's changed from that. Is if we're going to look at this on a 12-month basis, we've had 20 units in there. That's going to work against that forgivable loan, however we're calling that. And then you're going to account for that as we go up or down each year. And then we get to the end of the loan. If you've only had two people in there from Glenwood, you're there's going to be a big payback of that loan. If you had 30 people in there, you're going to be free and clear on that. Is that correct? That hasn't changed.

That's that's okay. So, if if we do that, changing that number to 40 is is pretty easy to do. I mean, we just we make that number 40 instead of 20. Is there Am I missing something there? um if that's what everybody decided they wanted to do. Yes, you you could decide that um that would be a more of a commitment and more of a risk for the project.

Right. Okay. So, but it but it's just an accounting thing. That's not a I don't I don't think from from our accounting whether that's numbers 20 or 40. I would think that's pretty easy be my guess. U and this this would be a question. You know, you you say, "Well, part of our problems we've been dealing with unpredictability." Um, we've got the same administration in there now that's been unpredictable over the last few months, last year. I would assume that unpredictability will continue forward. So, this I guess is a question for you, Carl. How do we, if we structure this and we get involved with these people, and I don't mean that in a bad way, but I mean we got involved because we are involved with you at the at the point that, you know, we break ground, we close on this, we're involved. So, if if I was building a house and I wanted it built by a certain date at a certain cost, I would put into my contract with a builder that there's penalties if you don't hit these dates. And I think that's pretty normal in any kind of commercial construction, whatnot. If you don't build me what you said you're going to do by when you said you're going to do it, you're going to have penalties. You're going to have fines. I'm going to be compensated for that. And I hold your feet to the fire at the end of that. How can we as a city cover ourselves so that if we we come up with the money that's necessary, we close on this and then again, my worry is not closing on it. I think we could get it closed. My worry is on getting it done, getting it done at cost. And when they don't get it done at cost for some reason, because again, my confidence level is is way less than it was in September at this point. So, how do we change it and fix that so that we have some coverage or there's some place to hold their feet to the fire?

Yeah. Um, you know, some of it is con probably conventional things. Uh, recorded deed to trust, although we'd be subordinate to the major lenders in a $50 million project and we have three and a half million in. You're pretty far down the list, right? Um, and maybe 15 years from now, we can at least get that money back for a futal council,

right? Yeah. Um, so that would probably be the major I mean, that's probably the best tool we have. I think getting involved in the actual contracting and and kind of penalty provisions puts the project probably more at risk rather than less at risk in terms of completion just because that will drive additional costs on the contracting side because they view that as an additional risk um that they're probably accounting for. Um, so I mean I guess the um, you know, we could probably come up with some kind of an acceleration clause if it wasn't completed in a particular time period where that forgivable loan period shortened up or tightened up, something like that. Um, certainly something I could sit on. I I I've had a good working relationship with council for this group um to try to find a tool there that would work. I'd say the default is a deed of trust and then outside of that it's perhaps an acceleration clause in the in the loan document that we might use um that is focused on project completion versus uh you know just non-pay you know typical non-payment things but it's a little bit more tied to like you would on a construction loan. I I think something like that so that we're not sitting here and having our constituents look at us and go, "Wait a minute. You just went through this project where, you know, somebody came back to you and couldn't do it and you had nothing done and now you've just gone and done the exact same thing again. When are you going to learn would be a valid concern?"

Question. Thank you, Council Shack.

Couple things. One be a kind of a rehash for Steve if you don't mind. Um assuming if hypothetically there was an approval that included all the fees being paid to the general fund. So we'd be at 3.8ish. Assuming that and assuming that the cash flow projections for workforce housing are maybe at current levels or less. Do you see any other risk to the city financially or operational wise other than the workforce housing commission not being able to fund or proceed with the existing programs they have if they by supporting this particular contribution?

No, I mean I think from the city's financial perspective what you're saying is right. I I do think that councelor Townsley is bringing up a very good point. There are only so many things that we can do to assure ourselves that we're not going to be, you know, in a situation where we close and we can't get this built, right? I mean, we're talking about making decisions under a very great deal of uncertainty. You know, both in the macroeconomic environment environment right now and in this particular project. This is a complicated project. It has a lot of moving parts in it. And it would be nice if we had a little more certainty in a lot of those places.

So second related to that and then I have one more. We've talked about this before and Carl and you can the city does not require to my knowledge any performance bond or reclamation bonds for large projects that aren't able to be completed. At least I believe that was the answer some years ago. If we were to do that, on the other hand, the cost of the project and probably the relication by the applicant would be thrown back to the beginning. Would that be accurate?

Yeah, I think you're talking about on a completion bond on the size of a project, it would be a cost that um there probably is some complete, you know, I I don't know the the total inner workings of the deal. I'm sure that some of the lenders have something in place or the the capital investors would, but you know, a a bond for the benefit of the city is going to be a substantial cost to add to the project, probably in the, you know, range of maybe even 10%. So figure another $5 million on the project. But we don't have anything in place for unfinished projects either at this point. We've

No, we don't we don't for anything that is private. Not, you know, for public improvements, absolutely, but not not for private improvements. Yes. Third thing, if I may, may I ask one of the commission members to come and address a question, Mr. Mayor? Is that allowed? The same thing. Probably. All right. If if it's probable and it's okay. Probably. I would ask one of you. We have Alex and Carolyn here. Could you please hop up? I won't put your feet to the fire, just burn you a little bit. Come on up, please. Yeah. And state your name for the record if you could, please. Be warned. I'm gonna have questions for you. Well, So my question and I think I think thanks Carolyn.

Yeah Carolyn Metra and I probably should have looked at minutes closer and I think Watkins could have answered but again I want you to do it here. Excuse me. I'm on the screen. I just want these two. Thank you. Um the vote to approve this was it unanimous? the the um board had approved the 3.1 million. Okay. 3.1 and I think it was unanimous and yes it was um there were you know the two votes in 2024 that was a unanimous vote and then the next one was uh unanimous as well.

The board hasn't taken action on 3.8. Is that correct? Is that what I'm hearing you? That's correct. This all right. And do you recall at the time of the vote how many commission members were there? We had a quorum. Uh okay. Um Watkins, can you address what the full capacity number is and how many were there? I do not know the number that were there. I can look in my notes. I have

That's all right. My last my last question realizing you are not the official representatives of the commission but in your best opinion if 3.8 were approved knowing that there's a great likelihood that your operational [clears throat] ability and funding ability to carry forward the next few years with what you're already in place might be in jeopardy. Do you feel like there's still strong support for this project?

I'll I'll give my answer and then Caroline can give hers. I personally support the project. It's a amazing project. We supported at 3.1 million. It's it's a lot more to go to 3.8 million and it does put at risk some of the other work that the that the board wants to see happen. Um the the cost per unit goes up with that. Is that too much? What I wish is that we had time for our board to meet and have this conversation. We don't. And I don't know if it sounds like for the project to to move ahead, any delay has put the project at risk. So I understand that, you know, that's maybe a luxury that we don't have. I guess I I had some questions about Kyle's presentation of you know I know that there's a lot of additional costs but it was I was also seeing some additional revenue that you were getting that was more than

let's not start the conversation between board precisely I don't want this isn't a board meeting Carolyn would you concur to some extent um yes I would I um I've been involved with affordable housing in different kind of aspects for many years and um this is a project that yes, maybe there's only a guarantee of 20 units for people in Gloma Springs um but a total of 80 units that are deeply discounted for um such a low AMI don't come around very often and um and we may not see this again. Um there the city of Glenwood has a lot of apartments that have been built and there's some beautiful buildings.

I want to cut you off. I think you've answered the question. I don't want to take up more of your time and ours. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks guys. Uh, Councelor Smith,

thank you and and thanks for councelor Shaper because our our minds seem to be in parallel and not seeing that we had at least a portion of our brain trust in the room. I wanted to ask very similar questions either through public comment or the way we did it. So, thank you for being willing to do that. Thank you for initiating that. Um, for what it's worth, it was only one member absent from my notes at the last time um, the board met and commented on this. Um I I was at that meeting and specifically asked the board if they still stood by this with the cost the contribution continuing to go up and tying up their budgets for two or three years and they they were still quite firm in their search. So as far as I'm concerned my instructions from that board is to move ahead. The new 730 740,000 is the twist because we don't have a comment on that. The board does meet on Tuesday. Um, for what that's worth in terms of calendars and timing, it would be an opportunity to get um get everybody back together. Um, the I do have a couple more questions that on which the board members might have insight, but maybe more to staff. Councelor Townsley asked about increasing the number of local preferred units out of the 80 earlier. Why can you said that there are some there's some sort of limitation on that under fair housing laws? What what is that limitation number compared to 20 or 40 or whatever?

Carl, do you want me to take a stab at that?

Sure. Um, the Fair Housing Act does not allow us to show preference to uh to people based on where they live, which is what we what we do with our inclusionary housing. We want things to be resident occupied um people who work in the community. Um, that's the preference. Uh, the feds don't see it that way. So, they're they're looking more broadly. Um, so that 20 U 20 unit requirement is is not a requirement, first of all. So, that that's a preference. that's how we get around that. Um, and so that that's just kind of the best we can do. And if we increase it to 40, that just makes it less likely that they'll meet it for each year um, invest that they'll have to repay that.

There isn't a official federal percentage threshold. It's just more you're you're tempting them to question.

Yeah, if I may. Um, think about it in terms of the federal government is funding with taxpayer dollars on these credits from all over. Um so their position and the position of um Colorado in administering those funds through both through Chapa is that there can't be a hard geographic boundary on who can occupy those um those facilities and think about that in terms of you know they don't want federal funds being sort of sequestered into particular areas just for a singular community's benefit. It's more of a general policy just because it's a much broader policy organization or or the state than we are at the local level. That's all it is. So, we work around it utilizing some preference lists on and things like that. Um but by and large um this is really being driven compliant compliance with that 20 is really being driven by an acknowledgement that the vast majority of tenants more than likely are going to be blended workers because that just kind of makes sense, right? It's kind of how it matches up where at least a member of that household is going to be somebody who who works and lives, you know, not only lives but works in Glenwood.

Thank you. Right. I certainly see how that could otherwise be abused racially, so e economically you could go the wrong direction from perspective of this conversation.

Um so so by increasing the number to 40 or otherwise we're just trying it out see if it wise but we could pick some different number other than 20 if I'm reading all that right. Um, again hearkening back to before I was I knew enough to pay attention to the details when the project was dropped from 131 to 80. Was that a hard decision or can that be revisited? Uh, that could only be revisited through a new lane use application. So then then we're way behind in terms of timing. Yes.

Yeah. Functionally, yeah, we're we're here. Um, thank you and thank you for board members for being willing to be put on the spot. That that helped me a lot with the questions that we shared. Oh, sorry. And the only thing again I would circle back to the council's for the city council's decision making to the degree it might help. There is another board meeting next week. Thank you. Thank you, Council Schmott.

Yeah, I wanted to follow up some more administratively with the [clears throat] I guess I'll make a statement to begin with. I I believe this is probably the best project that we can get. It's way more expensive than we expected. to begin with. I think everybody finds that out when they come here. Um, our our concern is for not having a not having a catastrophic event where we commit uh 3.1 million dollars. Uh, and have it and have it disappear because of changing economics that are changing potentially faster than what anybody's keeping up with. And my my suggestion would be that in addition to the deed restrictions and the things like we did with uh with the mountain mobile park that that give us at least some insurance, we don't necessarily have to disperse all the funds at once, do we? Could we come up with a a a commitment based on a a funding schedule that's a conditional funding schedule? I mean I I think we're I mean to some extent we're doing that because we're breaking it into two fiscal years 26 and 27. So to Steve's earlier point regarding budgeted funds that you know um that second trunch we have to make subject to annual appropriations, right? That that's we just we can't commit

those funds in a budget year that we're not in or the next immediate budget year that we're adopting a budget for. So there there's going to be there's going to be a caveat and a a level of risk there for these guys regardless depending on what you do in that follow-up budget. Now could we formalize that? No, I I understand. So, let me I understand your your point that I think that what you're suggesting is formalize that as a dispersement schedule that is based um much more like a construction loan on targeted hitting targeted 30% 60% 90% completion as those distributions are being made. And I I think that's probably something that we could do. It's a little more complicated from uh Steve's team keeping track of it and my you know my team drafting it, but it's certainly a you know something that can probably be done.

Councelor Tanley,

you know, I I think what councelor Small brings up is is a really valid point and I wish there were assurances, but once we close this thing, we're kind of screwed. I mean, we're in it. So, you know, when when that happens, at that point, we're really good partners. I just want to make sure we want to dance with them to start off with. Um when when we had some people from the commission came up, they gave the impression that everybody was kind of go on this at all. But as I'm looking at the staff report, it says staff supports this project with uh the recommendation of the workforce housing board that has concerns about the substantial appropriation of the fund that will limit our ability to fund other projects and reduce reserves to a point that they may become problematic if we don't have the the forecast or not met. So why can this be a question for you? Which is it one way or the other? I mean are we and it let me also ask the second part to that question. We've got a meeting coming up in two weeks. Last time we met September 4th. I thought we're going to meet two weeks later. Now it's three or four months later. You're going to have there are some questions that you were asked that you said you'd have an answer to in the next week. Maybe maybe waiting until the next uh if if we wait two weeks, are we putting anything in danger? Because then they maybe be able to answer some more of our questions. The commission would have time to meet and go over that next week. Is that does that really throw something in a kink that can't be worked out worked through?

We're we're open to anything that keeps the conversation going. We we do have time constraints. Um

is is two weeks kill your time constraints because you're you're saying that you're not even going to get some of these answers back from other people for the next week or so. Well, what I want to say is some of the I I I'm wanting to think about wanting to respond to some of what you're saying about the risks of putting money into a deal or making a commitment now on a deal that then doesn't keep its schedule and deliver on what it's promising. Um but the reason we didn't come back two weeks after a month after the September 4th is because we did encounter complications and the timing of we rely on agencies that are very slow moving and have a lot of policy things that go into their decisions and so but where we are today is with the project that uh we're a group that has done a lot of work. We've been around since the 70s. We've never walked away from a half completed project that I can recall. the guys that ran this business in the 70s are on meetings with us all week long. They're still involved. That's the type of company we are. So, I do want to represent that. Um, and so from our perspective, this project gets built, right? If we say we're going to close, we we don't have an example to give you a project we didn't close and build. There's not one that exists. And we've built thousands of units. So, I just want to I mean, I'm not I understand the concern. fully uh that's rational, right? And so I'm not I'm just trying to represent our side and say uh we're going to build it. It's going to get completed and it's going to be what we promised because that's just what we've done. And so because that's the way you get to build it, do it again is because you deliver on what you say you're going to do. Um so yes, but we're we're uh we would provide whatever information and and we'd be more than happy to more about these um the increasing the number of units for the forgivable because we

don't have much of a stake in terms of that grant being forgiven because property value is going to go up considerably. And when the um the project will be able to refinance those loans if they still exist in 15 years because it will have um we did this one. Anyways, we did this one graph that showed that you get a huge equity transfer at the year 15 because the tax credit investor has no equity. Their equity is the tax credit. So they go away. So it's like an investor that gives you um $15 million and then at year 15 says, "All right, thanks. I I appreciate being a part of the project and they walk away. So there's there's at the refinancing event if the city decides you want to go to 60 units that are locally occupied by local residents and raise that bar where I think I'm trying to remember why we went to 20. I just don't remember exactly. Um,

no. I think that I think that's very valuable and and I like that and I like the fact that if we're going to turn the thing over to Garfield County that if there's less people in there during the time frame, if we wanted 40 and there weren't that many in there, then we're going to get something back on that 15 years from now before we turn over all that equity to Garfield County. But we should probably set the number now. So, we should set the number now. So, I

I don't I don't say think anybody sees a problem with that that I can see here. Well, and I I can't speak, Carl, to how how it would how it would shape up, but I I think we do have uh public funders that will sometimes say, "You need to meet this standard before we're going to put the remainder of our money in." It sometimes is more it's difficult to enact during construction. But if construction was paused and we were 20% complete going in just it's not going to happen. But if something were to occur, we wouldn't be going back for more draws, right? There'd be a [clears throat] And any any lender would do the same thing. They have a bank's engineer that's going to be there every week. We have a payment and performance bond that is very expensive, covers the entire cost of the project to bring in a third party GC to finish it. So there's a lot of layers of protection that the senior lender requires that protect the city ultimately. Um but discussing how to set uh metrics for when the project earns out that next uh since it's going to be reviewed and by each yearly council um I guess mostly that 27 council uh I mean we need the money committed when it comes right down to it but you know but if the project uh encountered some issue there could be control rights. Then the first part of my question, Watkins, is, you know, where are we at as far as serious reservations on staff's part versus the commission saying we were all for it or we think we would be all for it?

Well, it's both things. Um, we with that recommendation, we're acknowledging that it's a lot of money. Um you guys know this is a lot of money but at the same time it's a project that is u does not come around very often and serves a segment of the population that the free market does not provide for. So it's it's just one of these difficult decisions as tonight's testament of good. Thank you Dave Councelor.

Yeah. So I' I'd go back to dispersement because our if if the money's committed and we have a dispersal criteria and schedule then I think then I think this is uh this is probably about as good as we can get. But u I don't know maybe the a previous council were a bit sensitive because of a previous council that approved a pretty big grant to a a really good idea and two months later they went bankrupt and the money was gone. So I'm a little sensitive to that. And council check.

Thank you. Um, I'm still pondering what councelor Townsley said with some reservations about what we tie up now versus 15 years. And part of it, maybe Carl, you can help or something. What What happens to any deed restrictions or the current tenants in this apartment if and when this is conveyed to Garfield County Housing? So the the the long-term commitments of the project um to the affordability and the and the categories continue into the future. I think it's a 40 Yeah, it's a 40-year um project horizon for all of that. Um the question for us probably is um what happens at the end of that 15 years if that's kind of our window on these kind of loan grants that we we are doing. Um we I believe with the mobile home park if I remember the paperwork right and I apologize I don't have it all straight but I have it on perfect recall here. We actually had those commitments continuing into the future, but the forgiveness was triggered at at getting through the first 15 or 20 years at at that rate. I would anticipate structuring this very similar to those documents on that front that that commitment or requirement continued into the future, but the forgiveness on the loans acrewed at year 15 or 20 or something like that. Um so from that standpoint I I think we have affordability and Glenwood workforce you know for 15 or 20 years as a as kind of a guarantee as part of those doc of that documentation. Um, I do think that, you know, to everybody's point, we can raise that expectation to 40 units or 60 units. Um, on average, and at that point, I think I would probably do it on average over the course of the 15 years, um, to determine

whether or not there was a lump sum payment due at refi and transfer over to Garfield County Housing. So, partly a question re-trigger my memory. Right now, we have in place 1.457 57 million commitment that's forgivable likely to be forgiven over the course of 20 years with the right occupancy at this point 20 of Glenwood workforce residents if any other deed restrictions we put in will continue after those 15 years yes or no

I think the preferences could continue after those 15 years it's a little bit different because in the mobile home park deal we obviously just have a recorded deed restriction a little bit different there kind of similar aspirational commitment I guess but I think I would think about this in terms of a hard we know we're going to get it for 15 years we also are going to have a track record of who is renting in these right over that 15-year period they hit those targets we're going to be pretty comfortable that that's going to continue into the future right just by the the way the system works

so one thought I had rather than try and figure out 40 units or not would it be and given what K um Konespy is that what their track record is for likely long-term tenants at this price. Would another consideration a consideration only would be that says look at the end of the 15 years Glenwood workforce housing has first priority for any apartment that it becomes vacant. Is that a legal thing that can be done as openings come up? Our workforce has first preference as opposed to

Yeah, I think I think potentially that that is something that we could work out. I mean, I think that Yeah. Um

yeah, I I would want to sit down and talk through how we were structuring that with council for for Conzri. Um but they've been super open to trying to work with us on on making that kind of a thing happen. So, I'm I'm I'm comfortable that we could probably get there. Um, I would say just kind of my summary of where it sounds like you guys are kind of like everybody's coalesing seemingly around a couple of ideas. Uh, one is a draw schedule. I think that works because the funds are committed and, you know, we'll pick a four trunch draw schedule, something like that. Um, I think there's been some coallescence around maybe doubling the number of units. uh the expectation since we're kind of doubling the amount of money that feels like kind of where people are at. If you're if you're going to say yes, I don't know if you were to say yes, feels like those are kind of the major deal points that you want to add back in. Um just as a summary of what I'm hearing on this side. [clears throat]

Fair enough what you heard. I think councelor Hansen, you're done, right? Yes. Yes. So there is no deed restriction. I mean they Yeah. These aren't owned owned places. So I mean there is no deed restriction that's going to be there in 15 years but we could look at we could look at the you know how we're using AMI to judge rents and that's the sort of thing that you could put in there.

Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. And and so it's a what we're using is on that forgivability in those first 15 years is that an ex expected percentage of Glenwood workforce um on an annual reporting or on a like I said maybe an overall over the 15 year to determine whether or not there's a a payback at the end of the 15. I guess what I'm suggesting is that while you could probably keep something in there around that moving forward, we don't have a an enforcement mechanism necessarily, but we probably are going to have at the end of 15 years a pretty good idea about how the projects relative to the so we'll have a pretty good idea and you know after that track record what we can expect into the future that it's not going to change significantly on the makeup of tenants.

Thank you. If I see no more questions, I have just some yes and no questions for you. I'll keep it simple just to clarify a few things. Um, you you wouldn't close or you wouldn't buy this property if you couldn't build, right? Most likely no. That's more than a yes and no question. Yes, you're supposed to hear, right? So, so, so it it it could happen that you buy it and then can't build it.

There's a lot of folks that have a stake in uh in that uh and that decision would be above me. Typically, you you look at it as uh the greater whole, right? What is this? What is the intent of even owning land? We're not a land speculator, right? And we've had a Beyond that it's we don't have that in our mind right now. We're looking we have a lot on just put that there's enough enough of from the point we are now it only makes sense for us to think of of the original intent of 80 units.

So followup question to to Carl. What happens to our money if they purchase the lot but don't build the project? Well, um that goes to kind of councelor Schmall's um thoughts on uh tranches on construction, right? probably and not purchase and not well I think there there's a commitment at purchase we're already breaking this into two fiscal years right so if it's not moving forward I mean even without any other kind of an agreement if it's not moving forward we're not going to budget or appropriate 2027 funds right but what happens to the first million

I know and that's I was going to say I'm just like so that's the big picture just as a as the baseline um I think my um I I we need to work on the the exact numbers, but kind of my my gut would be is that 25% goes hard at closing. The next trunch is at you know uh you know x% of completion 25 50 and 75% of completion something like that. So potentially we could lose 25%. Yeah. I mean I think that would be the you know and I' I'd be looking to collect on my note that they had signed. Right. Right. In terms of but like you said we're we're somewhere down the line. We are but yes. Well, not really what not really the yes and no I wanted to hear but yeah. Okay. No problem.

Not at that point. At that point we're not that yeah at that point we're really not because there's going to be a lot of people like that. I mean purchase price of the property keep in mind as opposed to cost of project are you know tens of millions. So nobody is going to be out that much at closing if it doesn't move forward. Okay, fair enough. Have you had to adjust the AMI even though your cost has increased? No, AMI will stay the same. Correct.

Okay. Um, what was the other one? The most questions were answered since there were a thousand questions. I think everything was done. If I think of the other one, I'll mention it later, but I think those were the main two that I had. So, with that, and I see no more question, I'll uh thank you by the way. I open it to the public quick. Anybody here that'd like to speak, please state your name again for the record.

Alex Dowey. So, uh, if I had to vote on this right now, if we were in our board meeting next week, I would vote yes for the full 3.8 million because I am concerned about the 2C fund having limited other funds to support other projects. But I think it's really important that the fund is supporting a breadth of different kinds of projects. We don't have anything like this currently and I don't think it's likely that we would get another opportunity for a project like this. So I would like to see the the money go towards something that's important and valuable for our community even if it prevents some other opportunities that we might have to say no no in the next few years.

Thank you, Alex. Thanks for your comment. Please state your name for the record. Um Carolyn Mccraoft, um one comment that I had is if if this entirely falls apart because the funding is not available and it just does not happen. We have that money out there that's been earmarked that's been sitting there. We're not you using that money. Um we would be needing to wait for another project to come along. Is there something on the horizon? Maybe there is, maybe there isn't, but we're not using the money now um that that we could be. we're not putting it to work for um the community as as we intend to do. So, um you know, I'm looking at it's going to happen, but if it doesn't, then um will we find another project like this? It it may be uh a long ways off before it comes along.

Thank you for your comment. Anybody else? Anybody online? We'll see none. And I just remembered my last questions. Kyle, please. If you don't get the additional funding from us, will you not build this project?

It's difficult to give a yes or no answer. Now I what I want to say is we see a lot of positive uh I think the chain reaction of this approval will do uh good beyond even this significant contribution of funds because it will signal to all those other stakeholders uh that the project has made good on these projections that have been put forth for some time. So it even in the way councelor Townsley is saying that it does breed doubt when the project goes on and has you know is not hitting its marks let's say fully understand that and so some of what this gesture which will be very noticeable to all those other parties who have significant there there are folks who have a lot at stake in this too. uh folks internally to our our personal guaranurs or our company and and you know and other third parties outside of us. So um it is an extraordinary uh commitment from the city for any city to do to do something like this. So uh and I think that is not lost on the folks that have done this before. So I think the it's a it's a big message right that the city wants this type of project. The city has decided this was the project they wanted to see happen. maybe not in the way they wanted to see happen. Um, but that goes beyond uh what we could tell them, you know, about, hey, we're ready, you know, because I think we really are now. We have we had a lot of these things go right. Um, the challenges are still there's still challenges that will, I'm sure, come up, but so I I could if the if this was declined, we would continue to seek other ways to do it. And that's that's yeah I we're already right pursuing alternatives in case this doesn't work

out but it gets it gets grim the further we look out into the future. So that's that's what we're trying to uh work against. So I have to be honest your answer you just gave me kind of makes me think that there is other money that you may not need all our money.

I wouldn't want to say we're not An affordable housing project can go years trying to close. This one has gone years. It's We've had this land under control since 2022. We've revised the purchase and sale agreement five times. And so we have real fatigue with the seller at this stage. Our investor has been involved since our LITC award in December of 24. So, and I don't want to go through all the the scenarios that happen if this doesn't happen, but there are some things that will go on that will create some bad momentum. And so we are pursuing other sources of funds because we have to get ahead of that bad momentum. We're not going to say, "Oh, darn it. We're not going to do this." Right? That's not how anyone would handle this. Right? Uh a lot has been pushed, a lot of effort has been and and thought, right? even going back to the fact that this was 131 units probably wasn't the right project at 131 units and we kind of knew that but we're saying the area needs this type of house you know so um if things were to align to build this project it would be an unusual uh win right for everyone involved we'd all be fortunate to be a part uh but the sacrifices then those have to be weighed um and and for us here we're just asking for more money so we that we have the easy part in that sense in terms of this. But um if there if is there money out there that we're uh not pursuing, you know, we're pursuing every every dollar we can find. And and I appreciate where you're coming from. I just want you to understand that our mandate here is also to watch over our funds,

over our our 2C housing funds that that was supposed to be used for many other things. But w with this contribution, and I'm not saying I'm I'm against it. I'm just saying it's a lot of money like everybody else said. Um we're we're stretching it then. Now for what it's worth, housing projection or I should say vacation lodging projections are looking up next year. So hopefully we will not get in trouble with too low of fund balance in in the 2C fund. But anyway, uh was again I was hoping for a yes or no question, but that's fine. No problem. Anybody else? Any other questions? We'll be done. We already asked the public. We'll bring it back. Entertaining a motion in item eight. Can you miss the financial contribution? Council Townsley, please.

We do have a session for just comments here before we make motion. I prefer the motion first to second and then we discuss. I I would make a motion that we I had reservations until we heard from the workforce housing members that are here because that was, you know, it's their money that we're not their money, it's our money, it's the citizens money, but that helps me. I was going to ask the people here on the council that set on it. But but based on that, I would make a motion that we do approve the funding the way it's been given to us. I think Steve can figure out how to work it out best between he and Carl and you know make sure that we're covered and make it I would kind of everything we discussed

everything that we've discussed definitely be against any type of ever going back in and uh dipping into the general fund to to support this. Um the other thing I would say to Kyle is that if if you come back to us for one more time and say I need more money I would say scrap the project. Seriously, just so that's out front. I just, you know, let's let's get that out there. So, in that in that case, I would make a more a motion to support the ask from the or the staff. All right. Thank you. And mayor prom Solinski. Can we include that we backfill the um fees as part of that motion? I want to make sure. Well, no, the part on our end.

It's on our end. Tons of times they discussed I was without a doubt. Okay, those do get backfilled. They get backfilled before any of the other money gets paid out. I mean, we go ahead and that's we pay ourselves first or very quickly therefore and we also up the number of units to 40. So, this is the 3.8. It's 3 3.8. We up it to 40. We back fill ourselves out of that. 40 40 is in the motion. 40. 40 is in the motion. And and I think that we're just protecting ourselves up front. It's, you know, all we're going to do is we're going to get paid later back if for some reason that doesn't happen. I think I think it probably will. I think just the nature of it will probably take care of that. Okay. So, we had a a motion with extended uh conditions and ideas and findings

and then I would like to second that motion. Okay. Excellent. Now, it is already like I don't know what it is almost nine o'clock but open for discussion. Councilor Shak first. I would just like to get clarification because it's not in front of us. We got 1.57 million a conditional loan and all likelihood we that will be forgiven. We got 785 approved prior. We're going to approve another No, that's what we approved today. No, no, that was approved once already. 7:30. I mean the

yeah 730 and we will get fees paid is that based on this motion? Yes. Then we have another 1.5 to two times 785 in addition from the workforce housing. So we're going to come up to a total of 3.8. Okay. Thank you councelor Smith. Thank you. Um, does this motion assume or specify where the new version of fees backfield comes from? That that comes from the the city back billing, right? But from which funding? From 2C. From 2C, not using the general fund. Yeah.

Um, is there time for comments? Yes. Okay. Mainly discuss and to discuss.

That's right. to discuss. Um my inclination for for many weeks has been not to support this amount of money while being enthused about the project um because of the crimp it puts on all the other programs in the workforce housing fund. Um, I have a particular preference toward pro services and projects and initiatives within that fund that favor house home ownership. And this is yet another dose of a rental, greatly improved rental version, but we're we're going to going to lose opportunities on down payment assistance and other things that contribute to actual homeownership, which I think has a different set of benefits. Um, I won't make a motion or an amendment, but I'll kind of pose the question to see if other coun council members want to comment. In spite of what I just said, I'm inclined to have been inclined to vote yes because I felt like that's the instructions I had from the workforce housing advisory board. that last version of advice from that board didn't have the new double dose of $730,000 if they didn't have that in mind when they said that we heard from two members. Should we question I pose to see if anybody wants to respond as you as you get your turn. Um should we wait two weeks and give them another chance to meet and advise? Um um otherwise I'm inclined to support it because the current recommendation that board is supportive.

Thank you. Thank you councelor Shack. Council who? You. Me. Yeah. Oh you sure.

Um I I will I've shared concerns and I think I've said it of councelor Smith. Um, I'm concerned about the ongoing ability of workforce housing, but I'm also struck with, I think what many of us realize is there is not an opportunity like this, even though it's not owned, to provide this many units of quality long-term rental housing at this price for Glenwood, let alone any community. And that alone, the the social benefit combined with the Glenwood benefit would make me support this even though um I'm concerned and some of the other concerns I've heard up here about risk. The risk sounds like the because the risk of fees are really not um the um tap fees are not at risk. We've got tranches of payments. We've done what we can with an established developer to minimize the risks. and I've heard from what I considered a fairly fiscally conservative member make the motion. Um, I will support it because I don't think we'll have an opportunity like this during any of our tenurs here. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Towns. I just I want to acknowledge what Councelor Smith said that I'm I'm with you. I would like to see us doing more for home ownership and pieces like that. I think everybody I talk to says we've got enough rental properties. I just think this one is different in that it serves a portion of our populace that is totally unserved by anything else that we've looked at doing. Uh, you know, when you get somebody that it's going to come in at those percent amis and have a place to live in Glenwood and call it home, we're not supporting that anywhere else in anything else that I've seen done, whether it's down payment assistant, good deeds, anything else like that. So, that's where I would that's where I'd draw the difference on this one while still saying that I think what you're saying is exactly right. I would prefer to have be looking at stuff that's home ownership versus more rentals. I just think that that we are providing something here that's not provided anywhere else.

Mayor Prom and I'm going to just reiterate what um both councelor Tley and uh councelor Shatner said. Not everybody can buy and so far everything that we've done with the workforce housing funds has actually gone towards ownership with Benedict with um or sorry not the Benedict with um Carter with the confluence with the down payment assistance. Um some people just either don't want to own they don't want the responsibility um they may not have a credit limit or credit rating that would provide that opportunity. So you know this does fulfill a need. The other thing is I remember when I was lobbying for us to start to you know create this fund and it was really not very many people thought we'd do be able to do much with it. Um this is really extending adding 80 doiciles to workforce housing is not something that's insignificant and I think that um that deserves recognition as well. So, you know, I think that although we are tying the hands for the next couple of years, I think we are still being good stewards with the money um that was funded in the intent that it was meant to serve. So, I'm in full support of this.

Thank you, Council Shaker.

Thanks. I I also think we are we haven't precluded home ownership at this point. We've got a commitment to good deeds that depending on how financing goes in the next two years could continue and we might be able there's nothing that precludes us from another grant for our own down payment assistance. We've created 40 homeowner units at the mobile home park. I think the accomplishments are huge should it be skewed in the future hopefully to home ownership if it's economically possible. in Glenwood. Yes, but we haven't shut it off yet and so we still have those programs going on for at least a year or two pending what happens. So, thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments? Um, so I'm looking at these two balances in our funds for for 26 and 27 and and I'm not struggling. I'm just I'm just weighing back and forth and I'm looking at your project and I'm I'm hearing everything you guys said and and a lot of it rings true. The uh 20 to 80% AMI is is simply unheard of. We we we do not get that kind of project even on free land. We don't get it. Um so and and and who's to say we can't run these balances down? Why do we have to keep stuff in it? If there's other thing that comes along, the money is here to be spent in the intent that we collect it for. So, I will support this, but I just want to point out it's a lot of money. It's a It's the most we've It's the most I've ever spent. It's a It's a lot of money. And I think I think you respect that. I really do that we that we're doing this contribution to to help you build something that's for the greater good of Glenwood and uh I I think I think that's that's that's where I went with left right brain um kind of figuring out what this is but um Council Townsley hit it on on on the head when he said this is this doesn't come along very often and whatever we have built in the past is a far cry from it. So, um I think that's it. I think with that I'll call the question.

Well, the motion was a little peacemeal. Can I read it so we all are Please do. All right. Approve the funding including the backfill from TUSC with uh details worked out by Carl and Steve the way it's been viewed and avoid using funds from the general fund. And if this project comes back and asks for more money, it's denied. [laughter] That's awesome. And the 30 units and the 40 and the 40 units. Including 40 units instead of 20. Thanks. [laughter]

I was taking it. I know. Well, okay. So I I I was gonna say I think everybody understands the motion, right? And everybody gets what we're doing. Not that is not included. But I think it was well it was heard. I think it was heard. Yeah. So all right. Um I also like the 40 units. That's I think is part of the deal. Um so anyway, with that I'll call for the question. It passes 70. Right. So, you're gonna come back and give us updates, right?

We'll do well by parts of our team to be here. Can you come to the microphone? Yeah, please.

Look, it's it's a heavy commitment, right? For all for everyone involved. This is a heavy commitment because for one person you're serving, you're not serving someone else. And you want to make sure and I think we we do want to do good and I think that we will make good on this commitment to build this in in the manner that we're promising to do it. Um u and we will share with you how we're making that a reality. You know because I you know the challenge is ongoing right that things will be unex unexpected things are going to happen. Uh but that every project I've shown you unexpected things happen rather than tell you those horror stories because nobody wants to hear that, right? But we we get to the finish line. So that that's all our efforts will go there and we'll do our best to keep the uh communication useful to you in terms of how we're going to get there.

We I'm pretty sure we all want to we'd love to hear updates of what's going on. And you did hear councelor Townsley. He said this is it. You use the word scrap. Bag is full. There's no more. Yeah. Anyway, thank you. We appreciate your time to listen to this over and thank you. Thank you for being here. Thank you. Do you guys need the recess? Okay. Five minute recess. We have a short

Before we move into uh item 9, resolution 202529, I'm informed that we are moving item 10 and 11 to next meeting which is December 18th from what I know. So, those two items are out for tonight and I started without Steve being here, but that's just how it is. Uh, moving on to resolution 202529 affirming intent to follow Proposition 123, expedited review guidance. I think it's Watkins for a few a few minutes.

Um, thank you, council. Um this item, this resolution is mostly a formality. Um this is a requirement from the state for those who opt into Proposition 123, which we did. Uh we are required by the state to review affordable housing projects, which is a term that is defined. I can tell you what it is if you need to know. Uh we have to uh process from process those applications within 90 days of a receipt of a complete application. Um there's plenty of detail in there. um they allow three different kind of uh distinct review periods um which we do have which they account for. Um and they are there are also some exceptions um some extensions that are allowed um and we can get into that if we need to. So um in Glenwood we we mostly meet these expectations. We mostly do. There are some times where we would have to make some adjustments and that's what we've laid out in this resolution here. Um, statistically speaking, if you submit an application on I think it's September 23rd of 2026, that would be the very worst time in the year to do it if you want a quick decision just because of the the meetings that get moved forward because of the holidays and our 8week deadline. Um, but these deadlines that we have are not in our code. They're policy um that we set in our department. And so therefore, we have the ability to move them up when we need to. And so this resolution would just affirm our commitment to um um efficient and responsive government um and to hearing all these the deciding rendering a decision on these applications within the 90 days that state statute requires.

Okay. Excellent. Um remind me again what's what's our benefit to to belong to Proposition 123? What what do we get out of it? We get funding. There are what have we gotten so far? Um the uh Canyon Vista, which you just heard, they are applying for project for for funds from the state that they would not be eligible for if if it weren't for us being uh opting into Prop 123. Just just because Glenwood Springs is part of this Prop 123, they're getting funding for it because it's within the city limits or at least they're eligible to get funding for it. Yes. Really? It's not fun. It's not funding for our personal housing project, but it can be that too. Oh, okay.

Right. Yeah. Yeah. That's just one of those things that one of the benefits of being of opting into 123 is things like that. And I guess the good thing about the Canyon Wisdom when it's 80 units against the 94 calendar year we have to produce, right? Even though it's two years out or split over, doesn't matter. Okay. Okay. Excellent. And there there are other projects too that we get money on, right? I know we do. Any questions about the 123? I guess we got Councelor Townsley.

So, I guess my only question would be efficient government. So, we're passing more resolutions for something that we already do and that's making us more efficient. I I always thought we should take more stuff off the books to become more efficient, but we're already doing everything that we need to meet the criteria of Prop 123. Yeah, this is actually just more creating the paperwork that we need to mail into the state to show that we're doing. Does it actually do something extra than what we could do anyway? Oh, we get some more money from this potentially um for the resolution or by doing it. That's what I want to hear. If there's if there's a benefit to it otherwise efficient government by having more things passed, I think is is a

oxymoron. But if if there's if there's more funding that you can get out of it, then sure with no matching requirement. Councelor Small, and that was my what other requirements of opting into 123 are attached. Um well, the the main requirement of Prop 123 is that you have to agree to increase your supply of affordable housing by I think it's 3% by the end of 2026. So that is what you're committing to do. And in exchange for that, the state makes available um all these different programs, grant funding programs.

That's right. Is the increase by 3% per year, right? Um it's a total of might have to double check on the number, but it's it comes due at the end of 2026. Um and our the number of actual units that we have to to create or to um to permit is 65. Say again. 65 units. So I'm not I'm not answering your question about the percentage but that is the number of units 65. And do you see any problem with what's currently underway in making those numbers?

We are on track to do it. Um the the projects uh Canon Vista is going to help quite a lot in that way. Um the mobile home project will will probably count. Um we're we're probably going to make it. Yep. I think the um the project with all three some of those will that's the dick do we're going to be fine on on the on the number piece. Yeah because Canyon Vista won't go online in time to probably count in 2026. Right. It will as long as we issue the building permit before the end of 2026. Well, it's at the building permit. Oh, good.

Thank you. Okay. Okay, any other questions? None. We'll see none. Uh, kick it to the public quick. Anybody here to comment on this resolution? See none. Close public portion. Bring it back to council. Resolution uh 2025-29. Entertaining a motion. Councilor Shack. Uh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. regarding resolution 202529 affirming the intent to follow proposition 123 expedited review guidance. I move to approve. Thank you. We have a motion to approve. Looking for a second. Council warmer.

Second. Motion a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, we'll call for the question. It passes 70. Thank you, Ryan. Um, moving on to item 12, ordinance 2025-37, appropriating funds for the fiscal year 2026, one reading. This is why she had to sit here the whole night. That's right, Evette, please. Let's play the seat. Oh, thank you. I figured what' you say

Oh, yeah. [laughter] Maybe not. Evening, mayor and council. I bet finance director. Um this is another one of our last pieces of of budget for 2026. You approved the budget back um two meetings ago. Yep. And this is just appropriating the funds and putting them um appropriating them for 200 26 to allow us to spend the money. Sounds great. Sounds easy. Any questions? Councilwoman, why can't it be one thing? Uh, it's just budget rules that you have to approve the budget and then the adoption of the budget is separate

rules by state uh the state budget. The state they say you have to approve it and then later on you have to appropriate. Yep. Efficient government. That's right. [laughter] Efficient government. Any other questions, Steve? See none. Anybody from the public like to comment on this ordinance? See none. Close the public portion and again bring it back to us. Ordinance 2025-37. Entertaining a motion. Councelor Townson. I move that we approve ordinance 2025-37 appropriating funds for fiscal year 2026. As written.

As written. Thank you. We have a motion to approve. Mayor Prom Solinski. Uh second. and a second. Any discussion on the appropriation? See none, we'll call for the question

70. It passes. Thank you, Ryan. Thank you, Evette. Have a good evening. We are at council comments. We'll start in the right hand tonight. Council Smith,

thank you. um a handful of thank you again for to to staff and and mayor for scheduling an executive session in the afternoon. That's different from late at night. I just think typically these sessions take on [clears throat] topics that need us to be at our best mentally. So I I like that practice. Hope it can be continued. Um, second, um, I'm intrigued now that we're into the actual enforcement phase of the speed control cameras that it would be helpful, I'd suggest to the whole council, certainly helpful to me if we could have uh an update soon on how that implementation is going um to see if we're getting at least initial results that we're hoping for. Um, my anecdotal stand on the corner and watch measure says it's working. Uh, people are seem to be actually slowing down on those spans where the cameras are, but it'd be nice to see if there's some data related to that. I'd like to have a discussion with the police department and with council about what apparently is u an active enforcement of a longstanding state statute about um pertinances to cars obscuring license plates because license plates are key to this speed enforcement. Uh, I continue to get calls and notes from people who have been stopped because they have a ski rack or a utility rack or a bike rack on their back of their car. I think from what I can tell so far that's counterproductive to at least two of the of the purposes of this program. One is to free up officers to go do other work instead of spending time on patrol or put them right back on patrol

with this this new uh thing. I also think that a key component of this to make the speed actually reduce is public buyin, goodwill for this program. And I think this may uh tamper that goodwill by haggling people over their ski racks. So, I'd like to look at alternative approaches and have that conversation. Uh if if council would and the staff would would agree to schedule some time. Councelor Smith, since we have a process and if you get two more counselors on board with with this idea, then we can schedule it in the workshop. Oh, can I do that right now? You can do that right now.

Can I get two head nods that we'd like to have a conversation about that? And and what is it exactly about the enforcement of the obstructed license to hear from the police department when we do it about what appears to be stepped up enforcement for of a state statute that says you can't obscure your license plate with mud or with opaque covers or a bike rack or a tool. So, not to take the wind out of yourself, but in if we do schedule a workshop and there's actually a state law that says you have to enforce it, is it worth the talk? Is it worth Well, I mean, I think it's um my intention is not to get into the debate tonight.

No, no, no. I'm just I'm just curious to spend the time. You can't change the state law. Um you could probably have a discussion around where we spend time. Um, but I would respectfully say that getting into the operational details of your PD is probably not the best use of of you guys' time. Honestly, what is my reme what is my route to seeking options and alternative? I think if you wanted to talk to your your city manager about it and you can maybe set up a meeting with the chief and you can have a conversation around it. But

I I guess I still contend that I'm going to be smarter if I have six other smart people in on the conversation. I can come with what I'm hearing anecdotally so far and that's a selective amount of information, but I'd love to have two other council members uh join in saying let's at least have a conversation about this. I I appreciate where you're coming from. I really do. You asked me to ask for Oh, absolutely. I'm asking for two more heads. Right. And so can we get two more heads or to to spend 15 minutes in a workshop about secured license plates

enforcement? That's what I think it comes down to and and it's state law that they can't really not not do it. Council Townsley, I I think for us to get involved in the police department is wrong. On the other hand, if councelor Smith feels that it would be helpful to to hear from the police department at least why they do it the way they do it, then taking 15 minutes to do that would I'd be in favor of supporting him on that. I don't think that, you know, being a younger person that once put mud on my license plates to to avoid that. I I don't think we'd get around it, but if it's important to you, then you'd like to hear from them as to why they're doing it, then I would nod my head. Yes. Appreciate it. Okay. So, that is halfway there. We're halfway there. That's right.

15 minutes. We're talking 15 minutes. Yes. Are you okay with with the 50minut discussion, Steve? 50. Oh, sure. We can do it. All right. We'll put it in the workshop. Appreciate that. Thank you very much. Um,

mark your calendar, Lieutenant Hassel. Chief Hassel, I don't know what to call you nowadays. Yeah, in our last at our last meeting we last I think it was the last meeting or last workshop, we talked about um having more regular distribution of of calendar for future work session topics and future city council topics as they become available within staff discussions to have the council know about that. Are we still on track to have that come out? Thank you. Um the at the city council's October two meeting uh there was a request from two or three of council members to have to seek some clarification either conversationally or in terms of policy as regards um meeting procedure. It started at a conversation over um how whether we have policies on remote attendance by city council members. Uh but it also included some other things about timing of motions and content of motions. Uh as I remember it, we referred that to city staff, including the city attorney for some draft proposals for us to consider. What's the timing on that? I think we were planning it for the uh second meeting in December on a work session

coming right up. Thank you very much. I can't remember if somebody's gone. Marco's gone. That's right. So that's why it wasn't on the list that we put in because I didn't know if you wanted us to do that while you were gone or not. You guys can handle anything. It'll be on the second meeting in December. Yeah.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, also I had a pleasant, surprisingly pleasant experience prompted by the staff evaluation process that councelor Shaxter uh coordinated. I went to court. I realized that I didn't don't have a clue about the county city judge or the city court process. So I sat in on two sessions, learned a lot about how that operates and frankly was very impressed. I said so in my evaluation but um it was it was an intriguing experience. I was among other things I was particularly impressed that we have a very deliberate very well technically set up translation service both for court proceedings and for proceedings at the payment window. Um and that again among many other positive things there is a very deliberate connection between the court and youth zone apparently referral to youth zone can be a form of sentencing or plea agreement and I thought that was a very creative partnership. So I I learned a bunch of things was a nice experience. Thank you. Finally, uh, at the last meeting, Council Shakar conveyed a recommendation from a citizen for a book we might want to read. I read it, uh, a walk around the block. It's basically a citizen's u guide to Matt Lancor's world is kind of how the urban structural infrastructure world works. I've read it. I've got two more weeks on my library checkout if anybody wants the book. So, it's available. Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you. Councelor Shakton coming [laughter] all night long. I got it. Okay, I'm good. I know. No, no. Yeah, I'm so downsleep. No, I'm going from the outside in. Okay. Just uh one one comment I've got and it and it was kind of highlighted tonight when we had two people citizens got up and you know I feel bad sometimes when when people get up and it's it's tough. You know they're obviously

pretty emotional and upset about things. But I think just one thing that that I thought about personally as as being a member of council and I'm really want to work towards next year and I would just encourage all of us to maybe do the same sort of thing is is to talk to people and try to get people to come and use that three minutes not to necessarily complain about something but to tell us what they what they see us how they see us doing our job what they would like to see us be doing what if there's things that they don't want to see us be doing what they like but just to use that three minutes as a forum of of you know here's Here's what I think as a citizen because I don't think we get much feedback in that piece except for people that are riled up about something or, you know, are pretty ticked off about it. I don't think it has to be a [ __ ] session, but I think it would be good for us to encourage people to use that as as as a way of giving us feedback that it's not survey based. It's not, you know, somebody made some questions, we put a survey out to you. So, I think as we talk to people, encouraging them to use that. And the thing that I would ask is that if somebody's up there for three minutes and they're winding up their comments and the bell goes off, we give them three minutes and 15 seconds. If somebody's just running on, you know, it's going to keep going, we need to cut them off, we're all for that. But we we make it a little more personal as like, okay, wind it up. It's it's coming up to finish what you're finish your sentence, finish your your whatnot on that. And I think that could be a valuable tool for us. So, I'm going to encourage people to do it. And I would like to see it would be great if everybody could because we all see a lot of different people out there.

Okay, sounds good. Council, there we go.

Uh, I just had another train of thought going sideways al together, but but I would like to continue on that. I I would like to hear our side because I I don't believe I don't believe it was exactly as it was portrayed by either of the people who testified here, but I can I can easily see both sides and uh maybe I don't even need to hear from our side because I believe it's all justified and but but the customer service perspective I think is what all of us should be taking is that our citizens, our taxpayers are our customers and we should be trying to do our best to make sure our customers are happy. I know it's within limitations as to what any of us can do to keep our customers happy, but we want them to be happy.

Thank you. and Mayor Prom Solinski.

Yeah, I agree with what you just said. Um, two things. One, I got a request from a member of the community about the ice melt that we use on Red Mountain. If we could maybe look into something that's paw friendly. Lots of people hike that with their dogs and apparently the mag chloride is really pretty tough on paws. Yeah. And so I don't know if that's something that um could be a consideration, but I wanted to put that out there because that seems pretty reasonable. Um and then on that topic, I always encourage people to email us because our emails are published. Um it's a great way that you can I am much more eloquent in when I type it out and I edit it and I think about it, than I am when I'm trying to talk, especially in a high stress environment in front of a bunch of people staring at me. So, I encourage people to email us. And then also, I question sometimes with our firewall if I'm getting all my emails. There's times I've heard that people say that they've reached out and I just don't have it in there. So, I wonder if that's something we could look into. Um, and then yes, encourage people definitely come and be heard face to face because it also goes on the record and that's important. But if it's stressful, if it's intimidating, feel free to email.

The people I've talked write it down. Exactly. Totally. Just read it to us. But then they also get to Excuse me. But then they also get to see what goes on here, get a feel for it. I remember when Spencer came in and, you know, I talked to him before and after, he's like, "Man, it was really cool to sit there and see what you guys deal with and see a little bit too." And I think that's valuable for people. Holy, holy. And I think the more engagement we get, um, it's definitely a drum I've been beating since the day I decided to run for city council. So, I could not agree with you more. I think there's multiple different ways that we can get people to feel heard. Um, and I think being receptive to all of those is important.

Excellent. Thank you. So, to uh uh play on that a little bit more, customer service and many ways to to engage with the public. I hope to see you all on Saturday at the Holiday Bazaar for a donut and a cup of coffee. And for whoever shows up and wants to bend our ear, it's I was there last year and it was actually it was rather pleasant. It was it was a good morning. I have to say that was one comment. The other comment is um in the past council used to have breakfasts together and that's just the seven of us sitting around the round table and talking. Um

yes, I do. Family oriented is how it is. Mother of the nation. So, I would like to see if we could schedule something beginning of the year. We used to do it about three times a year and I think uh January is coming up, bless you. So, uh uh maybe Steve can send out a doodle and we can see if we can get different districts.

We we usually well couple uh times uh in the past we did at the Hotel Colorado because they had this and the diner we did the diner once and so on. So we can pick wherever wherever there's good breakfast and uh we can't make any decision as we all know but we can at least chat and get our get our visions out and however we you know whatever you want to talk about. So councelor towns there's a there's a brand new breakfast place the guy you probably seen him on next door is doing the Himalayan restaurant. They're doing breakfast now. I'll give him a quick plug. I went over there the other day and man it was good. They got a great cinnamon roll. A whole different provider. They're subleasing.

Oh, their coffee cups are about this big. Really?

So, let's see see if we can uh if we can uh uh reserve that and then pick a date for January and then two more throughout the year. That's one thing I'd like to do. It was uh it was always very uh I don't know. It was helpful, I think, for team building and productive. Exactly. Uh, the other comment I have is I went to the lighting ceremony at the hotel and first up, thanks to Hotel Colorado for putting it up again and and and it was spectacular. It went out went off without a hitch. It was the great the show was great. The music was great. It was just a a great evening. Wasn't too cold. It also wasn't very crowded. I think we had a a smaller crowd than years past. Um, but that said, the bridge got still clogged up. you could not cross the bridge at the end of the ceremony. It took it took a 20 to 25 minute wait to get across the bridge. So, we went through Two Rivers Park instead because we knew that way. Um, but getting at is I I want to commend the city for working together with the Hotel Colorado to make this happen. Um, I know we had um a lot of departments involved and I felt very safe there um because you guys put your snow plows in crosswise into the streets um so nobody could drive in. I I thought that was brilliant. Um I I just think it was a great event and it worked. It worked. We worked well together and it went off without a hitch. It was wonderful. So I want to say thank you. And with that, we'll go to city manager. Um we had a couple of guests show up tonight and express uh some displeasure in, you know, an encounter they had with one of our employees, two of our employees, both of whom happened to be in the room at the time. Um, I will tell you that customer service is something that we take very seriously. We talk about it. We think about it. We do take it seriously. I don't get very many complaints. When I do, I look into them. And I can tell you that in both of those cases, I've seen enough body cam footage. I've heard from enough people that overheard some of

those discussions to be able to say I stand by Robin Pitt and John Hassel entirely without condition on those things. It is a little bit discouraging sometimes that somebody can come in in an environment like that where there's not much we can say or do about it. But we are taking customer service very very seriously just so you guys know. And if you find or come across something where we may have made a mistake, we'll own it. We're not perfect certainly. Uh but I appreciate that you guys are are willing to give us the benefit of the doubt when things like that come up. So thank you for that. Um I've been meaning to send an email. keep forgetting. We do have a problem sometimes with email getting lost. I've had a few times where somebody's like, "Dude, I sent you three different emails and I go back and usually I can find them in a junk folder or something." That's happened to me a couple times. So, if you guys find that you didn't get an email that you expected, let me know. We're still kind of working some some bumps out um in our firewall process and stuff. And the last thing is we are members of the Rudy Water. It's Rawa. I don't know what to stand up for.

Association. Yeah, that um we need a representative from council. I tried to pawn off a staff member on them, but I can't do that. It needs to be an elected official. It is a very small commitment. It's a quarterly meeting and that's it. Like a 30 minute thing. So, I'm hopeful somebody will raise their hand. What's the location of the meeting? That's an excellent question. Meredith. Love Meredith. Can you do that for us? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Dave. That's it. City attorney. I don't think I have anything tonight, but thanks. Okay. Well, it's 9:45.

Yeah, that's fine. They still make margaritas. It's not a problem. Any correspondence? Nothing here. Okay. Thank you. Uh, social event announcement. All right. If we choose to reconvene, I would like to do so at Teapio. Where? Tapato. Our new favorite place. A new favorite place. All right. Sounds great. With that, I entertain a motion to adjurnn. So moved and a second. Second. Motion to second. All in favor say I. I. Those opposed. See none. meeting is a