Board of County Commissioners Business Meeting - workshop

Good afternoon, everybody. We are here for our federal lobbyist update. Let's go around the room with some introductions, please.

Jeff Baker, Commissioner. John Christopherson, County Attorney's Office. Nico Johnson, Commissioner's Office.

Michelle Halstead, Commissioner's Office.

Leslie Summey, Commissioner. Carrie Warren-Gully, Commissioner. Jessica Campbell, Commissioner of District 2. Mara Sheldon, Holland & Knight.

Sydney Hausman, Holland & Knight.

Wonderful. And who is online? Would you introduce yourself, please? or not right holland tonight great allison thank you very very much and commissioner rhonda fields is absent and excused look at you i know john is like yeah she did it so well mara sheldon let's turn it over to you okay let us know what's happening thank you um i am going to let allison drive this okay

We are going to, I was gonna... Great. So starting off, and just let me know if at any point you can't hear me as well as you should, and I apologize for not being on camera. So we put together some of the most recent things happening right now, and kind of, we were joking internally that there is a bit of a, today is the day that both the House and the Senate are back in session. So today we will be getting a lot more clarity and information as it results to a lot of these things that we're reporting out on right now. so a lot of the things you're going to see in this presentation are somewhat similar to what you saw in last month's presentation only because as you know they've been out on break and when they did come back um this this is what they had been working on was the cr so Here, as you can see, what's included in the CR, similar to what we had spoken about, most importantly to you all, the nutrition programs, disaster relief fund, there is some housing assistance as well, and veterans work, border patrol, DHS, surface transportation, and then as the, pardon me, the Defense Production Act, and then OMB federal grants rules. So those were things that we were obviously highlighting as being important for you all. Interestingly enough, what really held up this process was this hemp extension, the loophole that they've been focusing on. And I'm not sure if you all are familiar with that. I can go a little bit more into that if that's of interest. It basically was thrown into the CR by the president to extend the hemp loophole through the end of December. So now hemp products are still able to be sold at convenience stores and other places that are not regulated until December 12th. And that was to allow hemp farmers and hemp production to continue until that time. So it was voted to be continued and there is now that extension.

So I'll just jump into and share that the things that are asterisked that are on here are what was added from the Senate version from the House version. So the House version had all of these items in it minus the items that have the asterisks and that was added into the Senate version. The Senate version went back to the House, the House voted on it, and the President signed it. So that hemp provision was supposed to expire on November 12th, and this did give them another extension, as Allison just mentioned, until December 11th, which is when the CR expires. We'll see what ends up happening after that. But also the good news is, too, with that OMB federal grants rule, They cannot do any kind of determination before that. It's next slide.

Yes, and that is in the next slide because I know you all wanted to know more about that. I need you to catch us up on what that is all about.

So that is about, they are looking to change the rules on federal funding, state and local governments, and that is very problematic for everybody, including you all. So we do not have a final rule yet, and they cannot come out with a final rule before December 11. So at least we have that pause, but there was a very big public comment period, and I believe that there were a lot of organizations, a lot of comments that were made to push back on the administration on this. We don't have a final rule yet, so we're waiting to see what happens. But this did extend that final rule by another month because of the CR. So it was put in there by the Senate.

Thank you, Senators.

Yeah, and that is where we are right now. We're in a holding pattern.

This kind of happened while I was out of town. A lot of this was happening as I was out of town, so I've been trying to catch up on this. It seemed to me the biggest concern that I saw in just trying to read about it was that they could... There was a provision in there that they could end funding at any time for any reason? Mm-hmm. That's right. Okay. Yes. What are the other big talking points that you say that people are concerned the most about? That is the one that everyone is really concerned about the most.

You know, the fact that they can sort of do it willy-nilly at any time is the biggest concern. you know, I think high-profile concern. And then at this point, too, again, no final rule, but there has been a tremendous overwhelming pushback on the administration about this. So we'll see what they end up doing. But there's a lot of eyes and ears waiting to see. So we'll know better. And there may be, too, you know, depending on how the election outcomes are, we'll see what winds up happening on that, too. Nico?

Maura, can you just touch on how this affects or doesn't affect other agencies that are OMB?

I mean, it'll affect all of them in every which way, especially with the federal grant opportunities. So everybody has got their eyes on this. In particular, I can tell you, I know that NGA is freaking out about it. NGA? The National Governors Association. So all the governors are... bipartisan Lee freaking out about this and I know that there was a big seven letter too so I know that you know National League of Cities and Conference of Mayors and everybody has written in about this see the president bringing people I think

yeah i think too i mean the biggest fear right now too is that this is all coming down obviously right at the same time as the midterms so the biggest critics here are saying that all the political implications are being held up by this and it's kind of being held hostage so the biggest near-term uncertainty concerns just how future discretionary grants are competitions will be structured and so they're using these as um leveraging ways to have these conversations as we go into the midterms which is Quite frankly, just appropriate or fair, in my opinion. But that Congress could either extend the prohibition, modify it, or allow OMB to proceed after December 11th. So we're all looking at that date. Yeah, very closely.

Which, Nico, to your point also, you had emailed me about agencies go ahead and just changing their federal grants. And it's likely that they can do this now, even though it's blocked at the OMB level. Agencies can change their rules now. to follow what the Trump administration has suggested. So there's no really blockage to them going ahead and just changing any provisions that they have. Yeah. Thank you.

Yeah, it's more of a pause, less of a stop. Yeah.

Right.

Wowzit.

So they're asking them to wait on making these changes, kind of like we were told to wait to get a Supreme Court person? Yes. And they did it?

Yes.

Okay.

I would say piece of advice going into this is don't let it pause what you're working on still be shovel ready if you if you go with other projects and ideas that you have and really work them out to a tee that they can be executed very you know efficiently and not necessarily quickly obviously some of these things take a long time but being really uh certain on what you want what you need and having that information handy is still extremely important so as long as we're ready on our side then hopefully those things will come So that kind of explains that slide, the OMB slide. I don't know if you want to click to the next, and you maybe already have, because I have two different screens open right now. Yes, you have. We're there. So, great. Thank you, thank you, yes. Okay, so as you can see with this slide, nothing much has changed in it, other than the House passed the Senate approved C.O. on September 1st, so we did talk about that just now. The president signed it on December 2nd, and we will continue to be funded until December 11th, as we just discussed. And we are moving into a lame duck session, obviously. And then the Senate will be here for a little while longer, but like this notes, unlikely to vote on any appropriations prior to the midterm elections. Everyone's just focused on those now.

You ready for me to go to the next slide? Yeah. Okay.

So again, another slide here that unfortunately, as we were talking about, not much has happened with reconciliation 3.0. Senate action has begun. They did release some framework before leaving for the August recess, which we reported on last time. However, it has not been taken to a vote yet. So I'll lean to Mara or Sydney to add any additional color here, but it's pretty much the same as where we left it.

Yeah, they're still talking about reconciliation 3.0, but there hasn't really been any movement on that. They are really waiting to see what happens now after the election. There's a lot of, I think, wishes and wants from the Republican caucus. But, you know, at this point, too, we'll have to see, I think, what happens after. They are talking about it at their caucus meetings and lunches this week, but... There's not going to be a lot of movement. There is not a lot of time between now and the election for them to really do much of anything. You'll see what's going on this week and what the Senate has on their calendar. But, I mean, the House is in this week, and that's it. And then they adjourn, and they're not coming back until after the election. Yep. Okay, next slide.

Next slide, yes, thank you.

So next we go to the SAVE Act. This was something that Nikhil had brought up that we wanted an update on. Again, not too much of an update other than the fact that down here at the bottom you'll see in red that Secretary of State Janet Griswold has stated that Colorado is currently business as usual for mail-in ballots for the midterm election. There's been a lot of press about this today specifically. that we are going to do our best to protect what we can here because nothing has been voted into law on this. Nothing has passed in terms of legislation. Well, sorry, the House passed the SAVE Act back in April, but the Senate has not passed the legislation. So right now we're going to be continuing to act as business as usual. Mara might have a little bit more intel from the governor's office on this.

Yeah, so actually today the whole Democratic Senate caucus and members of the House filed an amicus brief that also is challenging the legality of the president's executive order on the postal service rule. In the brief, they have maintained that it imposes unconstitutional, unworkable restrictions on mail-in voting, including requiring states to put and this is in quotes, citizen verification list, and attempting to give the U.S. Postal Service control over who can vote by mail, which is crazy, as you all know, but they have been trying to candidly create chaos and a lot of questions. And I can tell you that I have had several municipalities ask me, you know, what do we do about our mail-in ballots? And I will just reiterate what Secretary Griswold has said, which is it is business as usual. Those ballots are going out as usual in Colorado, and we are staying in the course. There has been a lot of back and forth with stays and whatnot, so we are still in a stay period of the fact that it is not legal. So hopefully that gets maintained. But there are ballots that are going out in other states already. And Colorado is staying the course right now unless something pretty extreme happens in the next couple of weeks. I believe the ballots go out October 2nd.

Which I do want to note too, there's a little bit of news over the weekend and then again late last night that two federal judges have rejected Trump's appeal to go forward and give his power to the United States Postal Service. So at this time, it's still being blocked, but it's likely going to go up to the Supreme Court, so then we'll see kind of what happens. But right now, it's blocked entirely, saying that it would cause too much chaos for this November 3rd election.

So what, people would bring their passport, their birth certificate, to the U.S. Postal Service and get their ballot?

I believe a federal list would go to the U.S. Postal Service saying, this is everyone that's a citizen, and if they're not on this list, they don't get a mail-in ballot.

Which is completely unconstitutional. And so far the courts have been ruling that way. But it is on its way to the Supreme Court. So we'll see what the Supreme Court ends up doing. But hopefully our ballots will be out by then and we will continue to stay the course as Colorado has done.

So next slide.

Evil.

So Congressman Crank introduced H.R. 1490 this September, and it is basically adopting, it's a House-adopted resolution condemning socialism and supporting citizen-only voting policies, and it's calling for enactment of the SAVE Act now. So what this is doing, I mean, this is, again, what we're showing is kind of a very politically motivated statement piece of legislation that Craig is trying to elevate his profile given his current race as well as there's others as a part of this that are that are calling for the same thing. So, Sydney, you would have to think that you would wanted to add on this. Obviously, you had created this slide. So, if you have anything else there but this was a Colorado initiated resolution.

Sure. So, this one was a little interesting because they have originally put out House Resolution 1499 which essentially looped together four different pieces of legislation that they voted on with one procedural vote. To do that, two Democrats did side with the Republicans of the House and agreed to move forward with pushing those four pieces. So one of those was 1490, which is more of a symbolic act. It didn't create any sort of law or requirement with the SAVE Act, but it essentially showed that if the SAVE Act were to be voted on in the House, it would be passed. And two Dems came along.

Yeah, which, by the way, there was some... Karen Golding is no longer, is not running for Congress anymore. So he's kind of gone rogue on his own whims.

Yeah, he has. But interestingly, this was a pretty big surprise that these two Democrats ended up voting for this. I mean, it was just a rule. So, you know, as Sidney said, there's no real enforcement here, and it wouldn't go anywhere in the Senate. So... It's really more of a type of bill that just is a statement and really nothing much more at this point, too. But Crank needed to stick his neck out, and he certainly needed some backing from the administration on things, so he's backing them on the SAVE Act.

So next slide, if there's no questions there, will be on the NDAA. So Nico had also indicated an update on the NDAA. As far as this month is concerned, nothing has changed since July, but we are still working towards figuring out some sort of agreement here. And it's stalled right now in the Senate. So again, as I mentioned at the very beginning of this, we're hoping that things will shake up the next couple of weeks, at least with some sort of movement, but the House has already passed its version of the bill. So now we're figuring out whether the Senate will kind of restart consideration of it this fall or move the bill before the end of the year after the election.

So just to give you an update, I was on my Schumer's office this morning. They are not going to move forward with any kind of a bill on the Senate floor. They're going to use the manager's amendment that was agreed to in committee. And that's what they're going to negotiate with for the conferencing. So that conferencing hasn't really started. They're mostly quiet conversations with low-hanging fruit and The committee is basically who the conference committee is. And the decision making will happen with the four corners and probably mostly in the Senate. And they will have the heaviest way in. They always do. Senate always trumps the House. So the House version is the only version that has passed. And they're going to use the manager's amendment that was agreed to in committee for the negotiating. And so there isn't going to be a bill that will go to the Senate floor for a vote.

Which they've also looped in the SAVE Act on that one as well, so that's right. And it's looped into Reconciliation 3.0, so there's a couple different avenues that they could get that pushed through. Right.

As it relates to the NDA specifically, Colorado has one of, as you all know, I'm speaking to the choir here, but one of the largest defense aerospace footprints, basically, so there is a lot of conversation as it relates to Colorado With Pedersen Space Force Base, Shriver, I had this written down talking to another client, Shriver Space Force Base, Buckley Space Force Base, Fort Carson, U.S. Space Command, Colorado School of Mines, also a client. They're dealing with a lot of major university defense research programs. So all of this is tied up in the NDAA. So Colorado is frequently brought up as being one that is really on the line here to get this funding.

And I will tell you that we have three pretty strong amendments that are in the House version that we got in by working with the Colorado Department of Military and Veterans Affairs. So there's some good stuff in that House version that we would like to see make it into the final version. So there is a pretty big advocacy effort and lobbying effort that's going on to ensure things like F-35s. And we're also working on MILCON funding. We're working on an issue with Governor Authority and moving from Space Force submissions. And so there's quite a few things that we lobbied very early on for the House version. And so we got a lot of good stuff in. So fingers crossed that we can get it to stay in for the final version. And get the SAVE Act out.

Yes. In the Department of War. Yeah.

They're going to try to stick that into any possible bill as a rider. So that would be appropriations, it would be NDAA. Those are must pass bills by the end of the year, or reconciliation. The only two things I can almost see getting over the finish line are the NDAA and reconciliation, even appropriations, which they need to get done. They're going to either kick the can or they're going to get all those bills done. But as you saw from our chart, there's a lot of work that needs to be done on the 12 bills in the House and the 12 bills in the Senate that haven't really gotten votes yet.

Okay, so if this is like must be passed and is good for Colorado, certain aspects of it, what, and there, I mean, is there any likelihood that they're going to take the Save, that the Senate can get the Save America Act stuff out of there?

Yeah, I don't really see the Senate putting the SAVE Act in to those must-pass bills. They're going to try really hard. The Republicans are going to try really hard. But at this point, too, since a lot of this stuff is not going to happen until after the election, we'll see what happens with the election because there's going to be a lot of political shifts. with some of this legislation and some of these bills, depending on whether the Democrats can win the majority in the House, whether they can eke it out in the Senate. And if that happens, Trump is in some serious trouble. And his power is going down.

But then wouldn't the administration lean more heavily on current legislation? what would then be now lame duck Republicans to push through all of this insanity? Yeah. And then with the idea that in July or in January, we just undo it when our people take seats?

Yes.

Okay. Yes.

Yes. Okay, so most controversially recently is this conversation about Trump's executive order as it relates to childhood vaccines. So in this executive order, it created three different categories to recognize a new framework that places childhood immunizations into these categories rather than treating all recommendations the same. I know myself as a mom to young kids, it's kind of throwing things for a loop. Doctors are staying the course though. And we've been advised obviously to follow doctor's guidelines for vaccinations. But these are the three, these three categories that Sydney laid out here. It's main focus right now is emphasizing on parental choice. So making this more of a parent's choice, less of a mandate by the state or government into your children's healthcare and their bodies. And it's basically encouraging changes to those state vaccine policies and recommendations moving forward. And in addition, that bumps down to school safety and scheduling of vaccines as it relates to mass population, large spaces that they're in, et cetera. So, but as we know down there in red, there's not been any enforcement on this EO so far.

No. And, you know, at this point, too, there's been so much pushback with this crazy vaccine recommendation, the, you know, trying to do less vaccines, but then breaking up the MMR into three vaccines is obviously very contrary to and contradictory to what the president has said. At the same time, because there's not a lot of enforcement, It's just created a lot of confusion, you know, especially for young parents who are trying to figure out if they should vaccinate their children or not. So hospitals are recommending stay the course. You know, the American Medical Association is recommending stay the course. They are pretty much ignoring, you know, this. This was like such a crazy, wild soundbite day, you know, or maybe two days, but at this point, I mean, I can tell you Colorado Hospital Association, everybody is staying in the course. Vaccinate your kids. That's really the best thing to do. And, you know, make sure you get an MMR all at once. I mean, the other thing is obviously, you know, parents don't want to take their kids back. So many times to get shots. I mean, that's just, you know, so trying to break that up into three is just ludicrous, candidly, to all of our friends here. But the lack of enforcement is fine.

I mean, that seems really smart.

Yeah. the timing of it too really threw a lot of communities space for a loop because like mara was saying it is not just because right now that it's the school standard uh vaccine recommendation as an executive order going back to school there was mess with paperwork and people saying well i don't have to do it it was the timing of it was impeccably too ironic right to have this happen right now so Next slide. So this session coming up in DC, Sydney did a nice job of laying out kind of what we worked on the last week, what we will be working on this week, noting that hemp product ban that we talked about from the previous week. We're back in session this week. Not expected to do a ton of work this week other than being here for the speaker's portrait unveiling. It's happening this week as there are lots of fundraisers taking place this week going into the midterms. Pardon me. Sorry, no, never mind. Speaker Johnson is having his official portrait unveiled. So that's taking place. And then as Mara has news from this morning, the farm bill will be marked up. Is that right, Mara?

Yeah. So it is supposed to get a markup. But interestingly, the committee is a 12-11 majority. And without Mitch McConnell, there is no majority. Oh, yeah. We don't know if Senator McConnell is going to show up or not. The markup was expected to be actually tomorrow. They pushed it out to Wednesday. Senator Boozman, who is the chair, has been trying to shore up and make sure that he's got the votes that he needs. Don't know, because if McConnell doesn't show up, we're still in the same place that we were with regard to the bill, which obviously the snap issue is the biggest and most contentious one that has been holding up the farm bill. The Democrats are trying to negotiate a two-year delay. Right now, Boosman is at a one-year delay, which if McConnell shows up and they get the 12-11 vote, they can get it out of committee. There are still going to be problems on the floor, candidly. But they're trying to show movement before the election that they're doing something and getting something done and getting to an agreement. Right now, I know that Klobuchar, who is the ranking member, who is getting ready to be the next governor of Minnesota, is talking to governors. and she has been talking extensively to the National Governors Association. NGA has had their lobbyists working with Boozman and with Klobuchar as well. I know there's obviously a lot of other outside groups that are weighing in heavily here too. The problem is Klobuchar and Boozman are not talking right now. There's no new negotiating that's going on from the last time in August when this was held up, and it was held up because McConnell wasn't there, Tuberville wasn't there, and they had all 11 Democrats that said no. I don't see Klobuchar giving any wins to the Republicans at this point now either. So waiting to see if McConnell shows up, waiting to see if they have the votes and everything. I'm in very close contact. I'm probably on the phone half the morning with Bennett's office. Bennett will potentially be in the next session either. If the Democrats win the Senate, he will be the chair of the Ag Committee. If he doesn't and the Democrats have the minority, he will be ranking member. So they definitely are paying very close attention. They are very dialed in. I'm having constant conversations and sharing back and forth until that I'm getting They're giving me some as well. So at this point, too, it is really like a question mark about McConnell and the fact that things aren't changing from there's no deal or anything. And if they do have a deal on something different, the White House has to approve it. So that doesn't seem very likely either. So there's a lot of hurdles to get over to get this out of committee. The biggest one really is to just stay the course and for McConnell to show up and for Boosman to have all 12, because very likely all 11 Democrats are going to vote against it. And that's sort of the state of play at this moment right now. And a lot could change between now and 3.30 on Wednesday when the markup happens. We'll see.

So this would include a delay in the HR1 provisions around SNAP penalties and work requirements.

Yes, hold on, because I have the specifics on exactly what it is.

And they're not able to just sub him out?

No. So he can vote amendments by proxy, but they cannot sub him out because he has not decided that he is not a member anymore and he has not resigned or retired. So he is still on the committee and still chair. So no. And then... He can't break a tie vote either by proxy. So if there's a tie, it's 11-11. He can't break the vote either. So he has to show up, essentially. So this is what they came up with. So it's a one-year delay to state's budget. So beginning in FY29, a choice between FY26 or 27 error rates when budgeting. And starting in fiscal 31, states with an error rate above 10%, which Colorado is, will owe 20%. So that's where they are, and that's what they would vote on, again, on Wednesday, unless any new deal gets made. And the only way they get it out of committee to go to the floor is if McConnell shows up. And the staff director has said, watch the news, because nobody knows if McConnell's showing up. But I suspect that there's a lot of people camping out near his house and near his office and waiting to see if he does, in fact, show up. So even a one-year delay would be helpful. Yes, it would. So we'll see. But that is literally the state of play right now.

The way to let it go.

Next slide.

So a lot of this, Mara, just said in the conversation, but legislation that will be pushed to the lame duck includes the budget reconciliation package, NDAA, and appropriations. Although, as we said, NDAA and reconciliation are likely the only two that will be really focused on potentially move the needle on appropriations. We'll see what happens there. And if Democrats take the House, one of the top things is to talk about repealing the GOP's Medicaid cuts and SNAP cuts, which is big for you guys, I know. And then we'll also be reevaluating Trump's tariff policies, ending the war in the Middle East, restoring lapsed ACA credits. I will say I think there's also going to be some housing changes there. But as far as... but I would say that would be a bipartisan effort. So that would be something that they would really try to latch onto because I think what we're going to go into in this next session is not necessarily going, we're going to, there'll be flips that are made on the Democratic side, but I think that we're definitely trying to lean into being more bipartisan and getting back to where we were before with more conversations, more joint wins and that nature, which I think everyone can agree is a good thing. So I do think that there'll be some in there that'll be bipartisan changes that we push forward as well. Next slide.

I'm sorry. If we win, if the Democrats win, sorry, Team America wins, whatever. And there are bills that are actually helpful even as in the bipartisan nature and Getting back to normal. We still have the same president. He's a lot weaker. Do you think it just shifts the balance and the equation for him enough that he is petty?

I think that there's more, Commissioner Campbell, I would say, you know, just my personal answer to that, and that's, I think you asked that question, is that right? Yeah, that was me. I can't see. You're all very tiny. Okay. I think that it really is just going to be, and this is maybe some of what of a hope, but in books that I've spoken to in different circles, on both sides of the aisle, is that it will indicate change. Yes, we still have the same president. We will still be under that same regime. But we will be shifting what we want to be the next steps for our country, because right now the Republican side is very under the thumb of what he says goes in terms of them in the majority. So if they're not in the majority anymore, they don't have as much power. And if they don't have that much power, then it's easier to say no, in my opinion. But Mara, Sydney, you guys can disagree, but that's just kind of what I've been hearing.

Totally agree. And I've been hearing that all over from Jeffrey's office, from Schumer's office. They are making some serious plans for what they hope will be a change in majority and what the next agenda will be. I got from those offices and they have shared that they are going to shift the dialogue. They're going to shift the agenda. They're going to give it back to the American people. We're going to look at affordability very closely and try to fix the mess that we have right now with our high gas rates, our high grocery rates, our high housing rates. So there is a lot of work that's going on behind closed doors to try to shift things in a very different direction for this country. And, you know, again, we've just got to get people out to vote.

Really important to get people out to vote. Do they have some Republican... have they talked with Republicans that are kind of on board with this? Because, I mean, eventually you do have to kind of, I mean, to Allison's point, you know, try to have the conversation by partisan. Yes. But they're not, what I hear you saying is that Trump wouldn't be able to say, you better get in line. And if someone feels uncomfortable with Medicaid cuts to their rural communities that are going to shut down their hospitals, they would actually be able to stand up and say, no, I don't want that to happen.

Yes, there is an opportunity for them to push back. And I can tell you that even in our own delegation, There has been a lot of frustration with being under the thumb of the president and being at his mercy when there are things that, like, we have two districts, Republican districts in particular, in this state that have some of the highest Medicaid recipients in the country. Definitely. He tried to tell them. I know. I know. And they know. And so, you know, it is going to be really interesting to see if they get reelected. And if they do, how they'll play in the sandbox with the Democrats, which I believe, and they have privately and a little bit publicly pushed back. A particular congressman heard at a town hall on Medicaid with Senator Bennett, a couple of them, and he is very aware of the effect that HR1 will have on his district. So he's also a little bit more moderate than some of the others in the delegation. But he is somebody who I have found has been very interesting to be able to work with. And he's talked publicly about it. And there are pockets of those in their caucus. So yes. Good.

Okay, great. And then the last slide, we're just discussing the DC agenda for commissioners coming into town. We're looking forward to having her. We have a meeting block scheduled for the 17th, which is Thursday between 12 and 4. We do have a meeting with Senator Bennett's chief of staff, Amy Friedman, as well as Katie Burns in Bennett's office scheduled for 2.30 on that Thursday. And then we have Congressman Crow, Peter Trapp from his office at 3.30. We're running into votes will most likely end on Wednesday. Members are rushing out of town. So unfortunately, we're not going to have a ton of member-level meetings this time. But having been its chief of staff, we're aiming for the same with Senator Hickenlooper's office, hoping to get Pat there. We've been talking to all of them, as well as Congressman Boebert's chief of staff is out of town. But we are going to get a staff-level meeting there for sure. Great. And then obviously the CB's CF, the legislative conference reception on the 17th at 7 Reasons, Holland Tonight is sponsoring that. Yay, thank you.

And I would just say that this is an example of how we're trying to maximize whenever any of you are in D.C. Like the sooner you tell us through NICO, then we're able to work with Mara, Sydney, and Allison to make sure that we're having those consistent touch points, whether it be with the delegation, or if there's something with an administrative official. So this is just an example of what you're going to see throughout the rest of the next two years. Great. Year pluses, whatever. However long we keep it going. But this is kind of what we're trying to do, and so this is a good example of that. Thank you.

And I do have a call into Warnock's office. Thank you. You're welcome. I was like, oh, I messed up. But it's okay. We'll see. Fingers crossed it's a tight week, as you know. Yeah, it is.

And I'm not bothered at all. I appreciate whatever we are doing.

Okay, thank you.

That's the deck.

Is that the deck? Yay! That's it.

Wow. Any other questions for Mara, Allison, or Sydney? Allison, I made us bigger, so hopefully you can see us. I see you now.

Yay! Yeah, did anybody have anything?

I would like for this time period to be over.

Oh, my goodness.

I do like the high drama around Mitch McConnell, though. Yeah, that's kind of funny. That one's kind of, that's, yeah. Who knew?

There's a stakeout. Yeah.

There are multiple stakeouts.

If I seem distracted during work tomorrow, you'll know why.

Yeah. He's Kentucky. Yeah, but so is he in Kentucky? No, he's not home in Kentucky. He is in D.C. Oh, yes. And he's been getting his health care in D.C. Leslie's got people. Right.

I want to know what neighborhood do I need to stake out? I don't know.

I'll have to go look that up. He's not in the hospital. No, he's been in an outpatient treatment facility for rehab. Has he gone into the Senate yet at all? He's made a couple of statements, but that has been it.

Have we heard the statements? Yeah.

Were they live recorded?

Were they AI?

You know, it's interesting because a lot of people have thought that. There was a picture of him in the hospital, but there was the newspaper. Yeah, we were like, he doesn't look like that. And there were a lot of memes around that and certainly a lot of AI videos around that, you know. questioning and wondering. It's been very interesting. Governor Beshear of Kentucky, who's a Democrat, who, by the way, I would say keep your eyes on him because he's probably running for president, was just with him last week. And he's really very interesting, crazy smart, a Democratic governor in a southern state, which is very red, too. Those senators are Republican. He has called on McConnell a couple of times saying, hey, where are you? You need to show up. You need to show up for our state. You need to show up for our country. You are on some pretty big committees. You know, the defense appropriations. He's the chair. He is chair of ag, too. Like, he, you know, he's... It's going to be very interesting to see. Oh, he's chair of AG? Sorry, Boozman is chair of AG. He's senior on AG. And he's got to be there for the majority. Very interesting. Well, thank you. You bet. Anytime. Any other questions come up, don't hesitate. Thank you.

And as always, if there's any follow-up, you can just let us know, and we can prepare some additional information for questions.

Will do. Thanks, Allison.

Thank you, guys. Bye-bye.

Bye-bye, Allison.

So is Space Force still moving?

Yes. When is that supposed to happen?

It's been happening. So they have been moving the missions. Well, I should say, I think you're asking about Space Command. Space Command is still moving. There are missions that are moving from the Air National Guard into Space Force, which is a whole other issue, which I have this amendment in the House version of the bill to fix that. At this point, yes, it is still moving. We'll see how much, I mean, a lot of it is still gonna stay here. A lot of it is. We have North Command here, we've got NORAD here. A lot of it is gonna stay. Yeah, so. But they are moving some assets to Redstone. And then we'll see what happens with Golden Dome, because that's a whole other can of worms. They're going to give Redstone a lot of it, but they're going to need to give us some.

But I did respond.

But we're trying to get our planes that are so dated here and archaic that we're just like, these things are going to fall apart soon.

I mean, they're old.

They're like from the 80s. So we're looking at F-35s, and wow, we're on the short list for that, too. That's just vintage.

That's extra.

All I would say is be prepared for more noise complaints. Yeah, you're not going to hear that. They're much louder.

Bye, Nico. Thank you. Bye, Nico. Thank you.

Bye, Nico. Thank you. Yeah. Well, bye, friends.

Thank you. Great to see you. I'll see you. We'll see you in D.C. Yes, you will. I'm so excited. Call if you need anything. I will do that. Do you have my cell number? I'm sure I do. Okay. And if I don't, I will make sure that I have it. Yes. Okay. Thank you very much. Safe travels. I appreciate it. Thank you. You too. Thank you.

Great to see you all.

Yes. Let's go ahead, everybody, and read a motion for executive session.

All right.

Go ahead, Commissioner Baker.

I move that the board go into executive session pursuant to section 24-6-402, parent 4, parent B, of the Colorado revised statutes to receive legal advice regarding the following. One. Preston case, an indemnification request, and two, Bradley case, update and indemnification request, and pursuant to Section 24-6-402, Parent 4B and E of the Colorado Revised Statutes, to develop strategy and instruct negotiators and receive legal advice regarding the following. One, Shared services MOU with the district attorney's office. And two, boom supersonic request follow up.

Is there a second? Yeah. okay do it the second it's been moved by commissioner baker and properly seconded i kind of thought you were going to do it since you were so that was all this is my honor all in favor say aye aye any opposed the eyes have it the motion passes we are in executive session thank you very very much kelly