City Council - Special Meeting

It's uh Tuesday, April 28th, and this is a special meeting of the Lewisville City Council. Can we get a roll call? Council member Hefner here. Council member Fehee here. Council member Dickinson here. Mayor Prom Hamilton here. Mayor Lei here. Council member Kern. Council member Coopermanman.

Right. If you join with me as able uh in the pledge of allegiance, please do. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

great on regular business tonight, we have three main items, but the first is that we have a joint meeting with our recreation advisory board and um appreciate all of you getting together, one serving and two getting together with us to talk tonight. Um probably let's go around the room and make sure everybody is properly introduced. Most of you probably know us and some of us probably know you, but in case um that's a good thing to do. My name is Chris Lelay, mayor. Barbara Hamington, Mayor Prom, W three.

Josh Coopermanman, ward one. Dietri Kafner, W three. Kirk car, director of public works and utilities. Corey Peterson, deputy director of utilities. Board, you have to push. There we go. There we go. Thank you. Michael Map, uh, rack board. Douglas Mter, third year you're on the board. Present secretary. And I'm Kathy Martin. I'm superintendent of recreation and senior services. Lisa Norard, chair of the rec advisory board. Michelle Vampel, rec board.

Adam Blackmore, director, parks, wreck, and open space. Sam Fox, deputy city manager. Langley, city.

Get you a two bucks. It's working. Okay. All right. Uh Judy Kern, uh Ward one. Ward one. When did I move? Got her. Got her. That took a while. She's ours. What happens when you have four and a half hours of meetings before a meeting or two? Basically, I'm across the street from the rec center. Caleb, ward one, representing W two. Good. Devi Ward two. I think our other ward one rep might object to that and he's here. So, you want to introduce yourself?

I'm just calling attention to you. Um, all right. So, um, thank you again for for being here. Um, I understand that you have a presentation and want to give you the opportunity to put that on. So, floor is yours. Okay, we're going now. Okay. All right. Uh, welcome everybody. Thanks for the opportunity. Um, I always love these um joint meetings. They used to be study sessions. So, that's how long I've been doing this. Um, okay. So, I'm going to kind of go through the slides um a little bit. uh and um update you on kind of what we've done. Some of this is from passed on from year to year, but we've still kind of maintained our same um um level of uh of um what we're doing. So, highlights and successes for this board for last year. Um we have supported the city's comprehensive plan uh aligning with the long-term and community priorities actively engaged. We've actively engaged in the review and implement implementation of the pros plan. Conversion of the outdoor inline skate rink um to five pickle ball courts we're super excited about. Thank you. Uh we facilitated communication between the golfing committee and council regarding the 2026 golf passes. We provided input on the food and beverage task force in evaluating and recommending a new restaurant for the golf course which is he's doing a fabulous job. The turn if you guys haven't been down there give a he's it's doing going great. Uh we completed our rec board uh 2025 year goals last year and we've been committed to the continued maintenance um of our tennis courts.

That gets us that gets us our highlights. Next we're our priorities um for the recreck board is the first at the top of our list is build a new clubhouse. that's at the top. So, at the golf course. Um, then we'd uh our next uh priority is add a fifth tennis court adjacent to the existing courts at the Centennial um courts while renovating and reconstructing the two east courts there. Um uh continue to identify land for soccer for multi-purpose fields. continue to support all of the maintenance projects uh within the outdoor uh and indoor amenities and recommending we recommend maintaining what we currently have and integrate integrate sustainable practice into the park maintenance future facility upgrades and long-term infrastructure and planning and uh the recreation senior center. This is just some um uh updated um numbers. The rec center, we completed our 20.8.6 billion expansion in 2019. Daily uh the rec center provides daily use for the community with 477,317 paid visits in 2025. Um they're still maintaining extensive programming in aquatics, fitness, and wellness, offering over 120 drop-in fitness classes per week. Provides programming for many of the youth and sports activity and activities. Provide a state licensed preschool and summer day camp and all of the special events that they do on the senior side and the recreation side or Yep. senior center is next. Senior center. Um they

provide a gathering spot for all of our senior community which is fabulous. Uh they organize uh drop in and organized programming and they offer many amenities, day trips, special events and programs, class and seminars, daily uh meal sites and the medical equipment loan closet. So they do a lot. They're they're we have an active uh senior group. Um, just to give you kind of an update on Memory Square, we did that. Uh, the new bath house was construction constructed in 2018 as part of the bond with the rec center. Did I move? Oh, did I skip one?

Oh, okay. Sorry. I'm like,

okay. Um, let's see. With the bond. Okay. Then we have the community park with space, playground, and pavilion. and the new uh playground equipment will be going in in September at uh Memory Square. Uh still have a six lane 25 m pool um a swimming pool waiting and bath house and we still have home to our competitive events. Our dolphins are still there. Fitness programming and fitness programming expanded recreational dropin swim times for citizens which is expanding this year which that'll be we'll see how that um goes. and the facility rental revenue that the pool brings in on the Friday nights. Okay, I go stuff out of All right, let me just read up here. Okay, Creek Golf Course uh is a nationally recognized award-winning golf course. It reopened in 2015 upon the completion of the re renovation due to the flood in 2013. eight 18 holes of golf and nine holes of golf. Um with the switching of the nines, we're no longer offering the five holes. Uh the completed 70% of the Ottabbon Society or Ottabbon Certified Wildlife Sanctuary Accreditation and uh David Dean and his staff has been doing a great job with that. uh produces over 42,000 golf starts and another 5,000 individual range uses for the practice facility and they continue to produce the largest junior programming in the state of Colorado. So kudos to the staff out there for continuing that. Okay. All right. Areas in which the board would like city council input and feedback. uh request council guidance on priority

for capital projects. Seek direction on funding strategies for the clubhouse um at Cole Creek. Request council input on sustainability priorities within parks and wreck. Give direction on what items council would like to would like the rec board to work on for this year 2026. And how would you like to hear feedback from the rec board on an ongoing basis? And thank you for your uh time, continued support, and we appreciate um working with you guys.

Thank you very much for the presentation. Um, one maybe what we can do is if council can if they have any questions about the um, presentation, we can start with that and then we can uh, address your questions because I think those are really good questions to for us to talk a little bit about. Okay. So, council members, do you have questions about the presentation? Yes.

Thank you. Thanks for this. I appreciate it. uh appreciate the work you guys do actually and and trying to figure out where things are and you know where we move forward and how we continue to have one of the premier facilities. Um I so we've heard a lot from director Blackmore about how busy the rec center has become and that it's a lot of um non Lewisville residents that are utilizing the services. So couple of questions I have. one, do we have any idea of where these usage numbers are compared to what we were expecting when we did the expansion in 2019? Like, are we exceeding what we had expanded to? Uh I don't know that we had um I'm trying to remember our feasibility study that we did for the expansion and I don't think we had specific attendance targets um identified in that but I can double check and um get back to you.

Okay. That would be interesting to understand like what the parameters were that made us choose the the expansion just because the the feedback that you guys are probably getting because I know I hear it a lot is that the rec center is packed.

The parking lot is packed, right? And so my thought is if if this is a lot of non-residents that are making it difficult for the residents to actually use the rec center, maybe we want to like have a whole another conversation on rates, things like that to see how we work to make sure that the Louiswisville rec center priority is um to her residents versus other I mean it's wonderful that other people like to share in it and help, but um maybe that's something that you guys want to talk about, think about, give us feed back on, you know.

Well, I mean, we do know our um I mean, our participation rate now, um it it is very consistently between 20 and 25% non-residents and so 80% resident usage. Okay. And that isn't changing as we're seeing the increase in number. It has not.

Oh, that's amazing. So, it's good. So, it's an even So, okay. Because I've been hearing a lot about the the Boulder Rec Centers and a lot of people coming because ours is just so awesome and they're really enjoying it. Um, and yeah, so I'm looking forward to that though, seeing what you guys think. Um, what we want to do, how we want to handle some of that kind of fullness. Um, more conversations on the golf course. But I I had a question specifically about the slide. What is the uh drop in swimming for the memory square for citizens? So that's for Yeah. So what does that mean?

What they're what they're doing that's the the drop in is when they've got um lap swimmers. you can just come in, drop in. Um, and I believe that even families can do just a drop in, swim, hang at the the pool on the deck, hop in. But the aquatics department, we're expanding the open swim lap lane for the lap swimmers. This lap lap swimming. Oh, that's what I was curious if that was like for the open swim that we're Okay.

Yeah. And that seems to be um it's the first year that they've they're they're doing that because they're I guess the memory square numbers for drop in open swim just for kids and families is declining and there is a definite need for lap swimmers that will take up that time. And we'll we'll we'll see how I mean they'll they'll the aquatic staff will see how it goes but I think it's going to be really wellreceived. Okay. On that. So, I did have it's a priority question, but it's still just a question. I know you guys put the golf clubhouse as the number one priority, but within the like under the multi-million dollar price point.

Um, like the tennis court then would you guys are still because I know last year we talked about this, you had said this was super high on your list. This is another one of those really continues to be a super high priority for everybody. That's why I just I wanted to double check. And I noticed the golf course bathroom is not on this list. Is there a fit now? That's a weakness. Yes, that was a weak point. Yes, Judy. But we still would love to have a bathroom on the front five. So, okay. Just thought I could. Well, now it's the back. Yeah, the back fine. Yes. Well, can we just say like every five there probably should be one? Okay,

there could. Yes. So, the the bathroom, if we ever get one, that would be phenomenal. So, maybe we can dovetail that in with the a clubhouse expansion remodel. just throw a bathroom out there. Appreciate it. Thank you. Y other questions about presentation? Yes, Mayor Prom. Thank you. I have a clarifying question that I think will help to inform um the discussion that we have. There was a slide where you had some bullet points related to the senior center. So technically, does the senior center fall under your purview as wreck advisory board? Yes. Okay,

that's helpful. And then I'll save my comments related to that to later. Council member Cooperman, um, one question. Do we have information about the demand for the tennis courts and possibly a new tennis court at Centennial? Um I know that the CVTA I know that there has always been a huge demand for additional tennis courts um maintaining the tennis courts that we have. So I would say yes within the community um there is a huge demand. Anybody want to elaborate on I don't know that much about the tennis.

Yeah I just um not my sport. No, I know. But but I I do know that there is a demand es especially within the the tennis leagues, the CBTA um uh has been vocal about um Centennial and all the other courts we just mission green has done and Pirate Park has a tennis court. So yeah, there there's a definite need. I I would just add I believe that has something to do with being able to host competitions

because the way it's currently aligned in the number of courts they can't host anything here and everything has to be away. So they want that court so that they can actually host. Okay. Thank you. Other questions? Um, Adam, just a point of inquiry. Where where does the Centennial Court stand right now? It was submitted last year. It's currently the new courts are on the unfunded project list from last year. The reconstruction is on this year's capital plan.

Thank you. Um, why don't we go back? There you go. Um, thank you for pulling that back. um requesting council guidance on priority capital projects. Um trying to remember just a second ago, did you have a a list of those? I think you I mean I I know the the main ones um the highest priorities because it looks like we've talked about the golf course for just a second, the clubhouse and then fifth tennis court, multi-use prop uh fields and then uh maintenance projects. Um I don't think you're going to get any objection from anybody on council about maintenance of what we have. Um, that's that's sort of one of the critical things that we do. Uh, but why don't we maybe we can talk a little bit about the clubhouse. I mean, we've heard an awful lot from um, uh, the golf course community and from certainly from RAB and you're kind of reiterating that today about that. And I know you've um sort of seen what our budgets have looked like and haven't um included clubhouse. I think it's probably a good conversation to have a little bit from our council around um around that. So why don't we start with that one? Yes.

Yeah. I'm curious. Um, I kind of think about the clubhouse and I'm like, who's the user? Who's the beneficiary as a golfer? And I would, I would call myself an avid golfer at this point. Uh, which is different than a good golfer. Um, but I, you know, I go to play golf and a beautiful clubhouse I I, you know, I don't I don't need while I'm golfing. And so then I think about the golf course and like oh we want people to come here to golf is the club. So it feels like a clubhouse is either like in a private club it is a place where like you know I'm a member of this club and so I get to come to this beautiful clubhouse and have dinner here and bring my family here and it's it's a whole experience right but in a in a public course what is the what is the benefit of a clubhouse for the golfer or the uh or the golf course itself? Are we going to get more memberships? Are we gonna get more people there? are we going to get, you know, $10,000 a person memberships? Like what what what is the point of a golf clubhouse for a public course? And I I think it's more for the millions of ways in which we can use it for our community and the way the residents can benefit from this clubhouse and potentially revenue possibilities from renting it out and holding events and from business events to, you know, birthday parties and weddings and other corporate events and things like that. Um, but for me it doesn't I don't I don't understand what it does for the golf course and making like the experience for for a golfer better. Um, the vendor that we're that is in there now huge impact on a golfer's experience, but with can this vendor even service an enormous clubhouse that has major events, right? That's that's probably a different style of vendor. So, I'd just

like to understand a little better the the desire and like what it is we're hoping because I I think I've mentioned well maybe if we like partnered with culture arts or partnered with something like it's what else are we using it for? So, if I could get just a better sense from you guys in the work you put in. What's the hope of it? What's the goal of it? How how do you see it being used on a daily, monthly, yearly basis?

I really appreciate your insight and I share all of that. Couple thoughts. So, one, the building itself, we've had studies, we know it has severe deficiencies. So, do we spend money to repair its infrastructure or do we start over? So, I feel like it's a little small for the golf court, the golf course itself, the pro shop's small. We've seen pictures. There's not enough cart storage. So, just the functionality of the building probably isn't meeting the needs of the golf course. So that's different than the golfer experience. And I agree, the golfers are golfing. They're not there for the golf course. But I was at Westwoods last week and we finished around 5:00. And I mean, I'm not saying we built anything like their new clubhouse. It's gorgeous. But it was a huge community event space. Like families were having dinner, people are having happy hour. They're just hanging out there. So that is kind of what I would envision for our clubhouse as well in addition to just meeting the operating needs of the course itself. That's my my thoughts

and I'll echo that Caleb. Um the the the golf cart storage we've got several hundred,000 of carts that the there's 65 carts in there and we're there's for and it's a 45 cart space. So right there then I just wanted the staff, the office. I mean you've got four pros, the general manager and three other pros plus Pam in a 12t x 10 foot area. So that I mean I I think that you know as far as office space and it could be a situation where this particular new building if we could move forward with at least some design review or some some to see if there's community spaces for others. I mean we're we're still limited on a certain lot size. I mean, we can't build a grandiose, but to have office space, extra meeting rooms for for what the city needs, maybe extra offices for other staff. It's a beautiful place out there. I just I think that the the potential for extra revenue for other um um events to happen just like when for the golf when Kayn was on the the golf team, we couldn't have the the event there because there was too many parents and kids and it was at capacity. So just to offer banquetss of something for your sports teams that are out there, there's a there's there's a number. I can't go through all of them, but there's so much that potential out there. that could be had.

I appreciate that. I think my my concern and maybe this will lead to other things we're talking about is, you know, I would love to see the Lewisville Cole Creek golf course be say less expensive for residents. Um, less expensive for kids. There already like some great things going on. Um, but that's that's a tough direction to take when you're simultaneously saying let's do an amazing new clubhouse. It's like that has to get paid for. And usually I would think, you know, brand new clubhouse rates go up. Um, and so I'm just trying to marry those two. Like I'd like to see both. I like to see the brand new clubhouse and lower rates. Um, and so, you know, this is an enterprise fund. And so I think one of the conversations I'm excited to have, maybe not in its entirety tonight, but is, you know, what do we want from our golf course? What is it that we're hoping our golf course is 10 years from now? And if we don't know the answer, are we asking Rab to go find out what what do we want our golf course to be? Or if we feel like we know the answer, we know what our golf course should be, how do we get there, right? But I I kind of feel like it's probably the former like do we really understand what it is we want from this golf course? Like when people describe it, what's our goal and then how can we achieve it? Because I I feel a little bad for our staff that we may not have a great direct clear vision for them on exactly what we want. Like we want the cheapest golf course in Colorado. They can do that. They can do that. We want the best kept golf course in Colorado. They can do that, right? We want and so I don't know they have a clear vision of exactly what kind of golf course we want. And I don't I think that I don't I don't know if we know what kind of golf course we want. So I think we're kind of stuck in between. It's maybe 90 bucks to go play golf there. That's not inexpensive. It's also

not 150 or 200 bucks. So, it's not super expensive. Um, so what is it? You know, it's not super cheap for a resident, right? It's not like half price for residents, but it's not, you know, incredibly expensive for residents. It's achievable. It's like I I just feel like we're stuck in between and we don't have a clear vision of what we want our course to be. At the same time, it's a beautiful course. I love golfing there. It's not a problem. I just don't know as a council member what vision to give it for the next 10 years or what to ask you all to do on RAB to make that vision come true. So, I'm kind of feeling like I'm in a place of I'd be interested to kind of task Rab with that question of like what is it we want including the golf club house like is that the direction we want or is it a less expensive golf course or is it you know more kid activities or better dining experience or a more fun experience more like city you know club a city a city course where it's like goofier here like what is it that we want? So that's it for me, but I I just have a lot of questions about who we who we want to be.

Council member Cooper, um I very much agree with Council Member Dickson's comments. Um I'm kind of wondering, you know, to what extent are we going to get that information from the pro plan or are those questions sort of drilling down into many more details than what we're going to get from the pro plan? U Adam did you want to chime in for a second real quick? Sorry. U right

the level of demand and interest in the course will be included in the pro plan including sentiment from the public related to investments including the clubhouse. So how we go about that or how far into the weeds that ends up being um is a little to be determined as you get through your draft plan review. So, I'll just add my my two cents. I think the discussion has been helpful, which is, and I said this during the prospin conversation, we just came out of um a lot of public unhappiness over um the the cost of playing golf at Cole Creek, uh and especially the cost of the the heavily discounted membership options. just sort of back the envelope to to finance a $20 million project requires a lot of new money. I mean, I think we'd be if we had to recover it from the golfers, it's 20 $30 more per round than what we're charging now, which I would imagine would probably cause additional outrage um about the cost of golf. And so, I'm I'm a little hesitant to sort of go go too far down this road. I I think the helpful thing somewhere on here was, you know, are there other funding mechanisms we can think about if there's some other way to to get $20 million? Um whether it's facility rentals plus um you know, plus some modest green fee increase um if there's some other way to accomplish it. I'm I'm certainly interested in that. I I think it would be difficult to move this forward as a essentially a city initiated debtf funded project um where we have to recover the cost from the golfers. So happy to hear reactions to that if I'm missing something but to me that's sort of the the heart of the question.

Okay I'll attempt to answer. Um, yeah. I I don't foresee this uh particular expansion, rebuild or whatnot being heavily landing on the golfers. I think we would we would not I don't think that would be that's a win-win for for anybody. Um, I do I would like to go down and see the potential of the revenue of what the the a new clubhouse and the space that would would be built would would would bring into the golf course, whether it's banquetss or or weddings or or whatnot. Um, and just more people in there coming that that whole um St. Andrews, everything's coming back now over there. It could be a great little opportunity for the city and the the the golf course to weigh in on some of those um um restaurants or merchandise or just coming there and having a happy hour. I mean, every little bit helps. And with the current I just have to say that with the current renovation, the remodel inside, it's amazing. You got Thank you. that was it it looks totally different. So that's people are coming in they notice. So that's good. I just feel that the build from the 2022 phasibility study that the consult consultants had provided I mean the the building is at the end of its life. So that's where we've been here trying to figure out okay what what appetite would council have? What direction do we need to go? To Caleb's um point, what would this look like? We could definitely as a rec board put together ideas and options. We've we've in our meetings, we've discussed numerous

options of what this particular clubhouse and I don't know about a community center, but we would have more rooms. There could be more communities, a little bit bigger space to house more people, events. Um, and so what that would look like, we we would have to just know. But if if there's an appetite that you have, we could definitely add that on to our task for this year. But if it's like, no, we're we're we we don't know what direction we don't want to go. We we totally understand that as well. It's just the building's at at the end of its life. So, Council Member Fe,

thank you. Yes. I first I'll I'll start this off by saying that I did go to the new restaurant last Monday. It was their second day that they were serving. Oh, thank you. And it was delicious. Yeah.

And reasonably priced, so I liked it. Um, I'm wondering on the same kind of line of thinking here, what kind of building we would build or would there be an option to just expand the existing building and update it? Um, that would be a little bit less expensive but just as effective. you know, adding on another golf cart storage facility that back corner and maybe putting the office space above it. I don't know. There there would be other options than just tearing it down, starting over.

Oh, I I I think we totally agree with that. We we would need to go we would need to have the approval from you all to say, "Okay, let's start um reviewing. Let's let's get an architect involved. Let's get go through the the motions to bring something back to you of here is you know option A, B, C and D on that where it's you know renovating what we have, expanding what we have and the golf course advisory board years ago had started a rendering but then it that changed but I I don't have those documents. I don't know if they're still there, but there was a plan that was done probably 12, 13 or 14 if we could find it. But we we'd start over from there. But if if there's a if there's a way you could help us start that process with an an architect, we would definitely um appreciate it.

Thank you. other council. Yeah.

Since we're sticking on the theme, um so one of the thoughts I had had before and I think you guys had talked about this too is you know the idea of maybe working with city staff finding a way to create like a not forprofit so that there are it's like a donation base so people can I always said you know I've seen this happen in private country clubs before. you buy a brick, the bigger the brick, the more it costs you. And there's a lot of people who like their name in a lot of places and they'll pay for it. And so, you know, for people who are interested in the expansion and paying for it, it gives them an opportunity to not just say, "Oh, as a taxpayer or as a golfer, but I dropped a h 100,000, there's my name on the building." And people love that. And maybe there's a way to do that and move us closer. Maybe not find 20 million for a new, but maybe the money that we need like um Deb was suggesting for a big change and like a rebuild versus like a whole new building. Yeah,

I love that idea because we've we've thought of it as well. In fact, um the finance director did visit our meeting in January and I asked as asked that question pointedly, what are our options to create some kind of foundation nonprofit to get this thing off the ground? And we didn't even get good guidance. So maybe this is an opportunity for us to explore that because we like it. Oh, that's good. I I like that idea. I mean, I I don't know where the rest of the council is, but I think for me, I would be very much in

this is a starting point. And um just to go back to a couple of C I appreciate how difficult this is going to be to fund. I mean, no one thinks the city has $20 million laying around for a clubhouse. It's a hard cell to the public. It's a hard cell to you all. We get that. So we've been really trying to think how how can we make this an easier thing and first of all is to break it into smaller chunks because our budget request which we talked about in our meeting last night is just to look at the feasibility like just let's just start the process not the whole thing. So that's kind of how we're think um adding on to this discussion. Uh when I was uh a volunteer at the senior center, we had a senior foundation 501c3 that raised money and then the senior center could accept grants from that foundation, but it had to be a 501c3 and then so that would be a possibility I think for the golf course, But exactly right. Um but maybe we could get some advice from our financial person um at the May uh finance committee. um director um Bailey is going to do a presentation on the golf fund and the uh

parks fund and so he will include a long-term forecast that shows how the golf fund is projecting and I can just give you a preview. It's not projecting well. Um, so you know, this discussion I think it's very timely because I don't want to give anybody false hope in terms of the direction that we're going. And so I think from staff's perspective, we just really need to understand if there's council support to do make any type of movement on this project because I don't want RAB to spend a lot of time on this if there's not a possibility. And I also don't want to create a plan that sits on a shelf for 10 years because we can't do anything with it. So, I think there's been a lot of great discussion tonight, but going to Rabb's request to get some feedback. Um, from staff's perspective, we would like to understand, is this something that's truly feasible that council wants to explore or is this something that we should be focusing on a different project that might have a greater uh probability of of coming forward?

Um, I want to weigh in here, too. Um, there's several points. I think one I don't think there is any appetite on council to change from an enterprise to some other kind of um way of viewing the economics of the golf course. I I could be wrong and people can and certainly say so if they they differ with but I think that's a fairly um strong sense that we have. I think you have seen our budgets. Um budgets are a very good indication of where um we think the priorities ought to lie. Um and um that's that doesn't mean they stay the same. Means uh and we've got a two-year budget cycle that we're involved in right now. And you'll get a chance as will everybody to to weigh in on that. And I think that's a really important thing to weigh in on. Um third, uh the pros plan I think is a hugely important piece of this and I want to defer to that. I don't think for example that tasking RA with finding out what the community sentiment is on that is probably the right way to do it. Um nor do I think I wouldn't ever want to put that on a voluntary board. That's just um and and it's the not not the right way we would we would do it. I think um I like the city manager I'm not and and I think council member Hefner referred to this too that I I don't want to raise expectations unnecessarily either because or not necessarily or not but raising expectations that this is

something that is you know um worth putting city funds in right now to bring about I think is It is a tough cell. Um I I recognize that gee with some architectural that might help us, but we usually don't do that unless we're in the process on that road. And I um I think the budget process will take its course, process will take its course. And I think that from the standpoint of um um you know, city uh CIP money, I just don't see it. $20 million is a lot of money. You saw recently uh council tackle a question about whether um to buy a $13 million facility. Um and uh you know we you don't have to to do more than just go and listen to that discussion to know that this is a certainly staffing space is really important. Um, we care about that, but that was a big decision. We decided not to go forth with it. Um, and building something new is not something you're going to achieve by selling bricks. It's going to be a pretty extensive um, process probably, you know, and is it something the voters would approve of? I don't know. I think that's a big question. Uh, whether that would happen. So, I don't know. I'm not I don't want to be pessimistic because I think I I know just I'm not a golfer, but um I know plenty of them and I know plenty of people who would really love to have a nice uh golf um facility out there. Um, I just don't I I'm not ready personally

to make that commitment that we really want to encourage um I I don't think it's a bad thing to keep asking about it and to refine some thoughts. That doesn't that's not what I'm suggesting. But I think we my own thought and we'll hear from others is that it's probably uh it may be too big a lift right now to encourage you to do I don't know what have other council members think about it but I others yeah you have council member

so um I like I think there has been years now that there's been the the conversation um I I would agree I don't think that it's going happen this year to be honest with you. But I but what I like the idea of one is at least some of you or those who can listen in to the finance committee and the information that director Bailey is going to provide to the to the council. Well, at least to the finance committee members, right? Um because I think that's going to also help shape a lot of the conversations you guys want to have moving forward. Um like it's almost a shame that this meeting isn't happening after that because then you might might be here differently, right? Um, but I I still personally like the idea because it's it's not just it's not the only space that we could use guidance and figuring out how do we set up a uh a method for people to donate to future projects and, you know, projects that maybe it is long-term. Maybe it's not something that's on the the two-year plan, but it's like in five years, but we have to build to a point. Or maybe it's just we're going to expand a building. Yeah, you're right. Chris, we might not collect sell enough bricks or have enough donated for 20 million, but maybe there's enough for five. And maybe five million does a lot of the things that you guys are hoping can get done in a clubhouse, even if it doesn't meet 100% of the need, the wish list, but it meets the needs, if that makes sense. So that's that's the one thing I think would be valuable is if um that's able to be put on the finance department's radar to start looking into how can they give advice on how to set something like that up. But I I personally I think that to ask you guys to put a lot of time and energy into it this year, it's probably not it's probably not where you want to put your time.

Can I just Can I Oh, can I just clarify something? So I just wanted for for council. So um the 20 million was just a number that was thrown out. So when you mentioned your five four I mean we we don't know what it is but that's just that was an arbitrary number that we were thinking what it was costing it could be 12 but I just want to put that out there. We have no no concrete numbers. All right. Council member Cooperman and then Mayor Peps.

Um I generally agree with the mayor's comments. I mean, I I think a good place to start is to go back to the questions that Council Member Dickinson raised, sort of look at take a look at those questions coming out of the pro plan, um, and maybe as a small part of that, sort of reassess a future clubhouse, you know, it having answered those questions or tried to answer those questions. But I again I wouldn't I don't think yeah spending much time on it this particular year makes sense. So I think in the short term I agree I I don't see a path forward with where we're at right now. But when I think about future planning I'm thinking about comp plan. I'm thinking about Centennial Valley. We have to plan for what we need down the road as far as services and resources go for the community. That could potentially be an opportunity. And I know it's not the timeline we want around this table today, but I'm just saying there are going to be more services needed down the road. And could that be an opportunity to re-evaluate this facility? Because if you don't envision it being funded solely from the enterprise golf fund, then it I think it needs to be a broader plan that services more of the community and that could be a potential route to go down. So, I'll be direct. I don't think you should spend a lot of time on it right now, but I don't think you should take it off of your plate of like future visioning because I could see that being a potential opportunity to create some change in that facility. Council member Dickensson.

Yeah, I don't disagree with anybody. I I think the elephant in the room though actually a little similar to the South Taylor conversation is like right okay but what about this building like so when the building collapses like we still have a building that needs to be so it might be unfortunate but we have a building that's under disrepair and needs to be upgraded or maintained or there's a huge investment so maybe it's not 12 million maybe it's something else maybe there's a benefit to doing something when you're when you're doing something right when you're okay, we're going to do a new roof and a new foundation. Oh, what are we doing? Let's let's go big or not do it at all. So, I think there's still like not not pursuing currently a new clubhouse, I think is probably wise, but it doesn't solve our current clubhouse and the problems we have. So, then you're kind of still stuck with like, okay, what's our solution? And um and I don't I don't see that here. I don't I think it's complicated, right? It's like, oh, that's just a bummer. Like, it's it's going to be really expensive whenever we have to do it and we don't really want to do it. So, we'll just keep not doing it until we have to do it and then we'll face that. But maybe it's a bond. Maybe it's something else. Maybe there's another mechanism because I think what we're all saying is it's not it's this isn't a private club that's that this expense is going to be absorbed by by fees, right? Um and and there it wasn't that long ago that the golf course was supported by the city in large amounts every year and then it's been sustaining itself quite well for the last several years and maybe that's changing but um it's been a huge feather in the cap really since co um golfing picked up a ton and it's like wow this is this is amazing. Not only is it paying for itself but it's making profit. Um, but yeah, we're we're in a we're in a tough spot to to solve that building. But I I guess I'm just throwing it out there that I don't know, writer, if you're

room on um we got to solve this somehow some way in the in the not too distant future in our facilities plans.

Um hopefully I think you're getting a sense of kind of where we are for the short term. I I would agree that thinking a little long term is worth some time. I I would also say that it's um our finance department doesn't set up nonprofits and they're not, you know, with all respect to their great abilities, they're not the best folks to do that. Um, I think to the extent that there's an interest in in that and some of the visioning you're talking about, that's a good that's a good um might be a good starting point. Now, that's a private thing, right? And uh, but sometimes sometimes that's worth doing. There are people who have strong interest in that, golfers, people who live around the golf course. um uh other community-minded people um that might be interested in that. I know and Council Member Fehee mentioned the senior uh board which actually spun off because they they just decided they didn't want to report to us and they didn't want us to set their agenda. They wanted to set their own and and that's a good thing. encourage people to do that where they want to do it, but that sort of a little bit separate. And frankly, you have a lot more freedom to meet when you want, to talk what you want, to move the way you want. You don't have to listen to the seven of us, you know, tell you what to do. So, um, I do encourage that. Um, that can happen regardless of what we do is sort of my big point. You don't have to wait for us. and probably, you know, the finance department isn't going to be necessarily your first stop to to getting good advice. I want to kind of move on a little bit. I think I think you have

uh you know, you have a sense that it's this is not a a dead issue. It's a issue that we know is out there in the public. It's just that of financing something like this and and whether it's a community priority, I think remains to be seen and that's the the lift that I think we're kind of waiting for, but getting good ideas about how to move forward might be a good thing. The path maybe not there just immediately, but be involved with with the budget process. And I think that's one thing that that um RAB can do to provide information to us. Okay. We appreciate that.

You know, and the other c the other multi- you know the multi-purpose fields got ready ex you know interest on this council for those kinds of things. And we talked a little bit about the tennis courts. I think you know those are um things to keep to do the same sorts of Yeah. We'll just keep and communicate is a good Yeah. Um other questions that you had. I want to go back to that though. Um yes, please. Are you suggesting we move from the priorities to the other questions? Well, I I was because interest of time.

I did. Can I make one comment? Absolutely. Priorities. Well, and if others would like to talk about these other priorities. Yeah. I think I don't need to go through each of them. Um, you know, I I would just say I think Well, now that I say that, I um when I think about the conversations we have, maintenance is a really big priority to maintain what we have. As far as sustainable practices goes, you know, I believe some of that's already built into some of the plans that our wreck department has with replacing equipment and such. So, I see that as um you know, an important piece obviously that's supported by us because it's already built in the plan.

The thing I don't see on here and um it doesn't mean it's not a priority, but I'm I'm surprised that in the top five priorities, I don't see anything with the senior center, which is why I asked about it before. Um, so I I would love and I'll let my fellow council members talk about this as well to see the wreck advisory board include something regarding our senior center in their top five priorities. What that is, I'll leave it to you and staff to decide. Um, but that was a little surprising to me to not see that on this slide. And I don't know if others have comments on that as well.

Like water on the table. Okay. Are would you like to talk just a little bit about these other two priorities and other priorities that aren't on there? Yeah. Okay. Go ahead. Can I just can I just So on for for maybe for our our discussion here. So the rec center kind of encompasses the wreck and senior center. So it's never not on our radar. We we always I just wanted to be sure that is a huge part of the recreation center. So,

yeah, I was just going to say I'm like when we were talking about the prost plan, um that was one of my concerns as well is that that it didn't it wasn't like a high it didn't make like a high priority list. Um it's the fastest growing portion of our population is those over 60. And so I imagine it's going to be expanding a lot in the next 5 to 10 years and a lot of people utilizing the facility. And it's the one thing that we really didn't do much with with the expansion. everybody else's like needs were expanded and met but not in the senior center. So that's to me, yeah, I was really hoping for a lot of that to come forward. I see a lot of other facilities um throughout the region that are making like really good um improvements to it so that it can be utilized, you know, more fully. And I feel like every time I go to the to the wreck and senior center, like a lot of this B except for during the day when there's like a specific program, it's always consumed with all just wreck activities. Um, and it could be that I like I don't show up at 8:00 in the morning. I show up at like, you know, 6 o'clock at night instead. But that's where I was thinking too that it's, you know, as as that population grows that there should be I'm surprised we're not hearing more from that community necessarily on what we could do. I mean, they do. Maybe we needed to to bullet point a lot more, but what the what the senior center does is amazing as far as all the amenities, activities, um, massage, they've got the foot, um, the games, they've got the meals, and during the expansion, the senior center portion of the rec center greatly expanded.

Yeah. So, as far as that front, the library change, the kitchen um uh was what, double the size?

Well, the preschool used to be back in there and the preschool moved out and that freed up all that space. Interestingly, at the rec board meeting last night, we actually had a presentation about the senior center. And really, yeah, there's the center, the physical center, but I think of it more as a programming, you know, it's the community building, it's the lunches, and they probably are getting full for the lunch space, but it's the trips and the games, and it's it's truly the programming, I think, that is the focus less than the facility itself.

Yeah. counci. Um, just expanding on that, the in addition to having the the preschool move out, the senior offices also moved out into the wreck area and that whole uh north side of the building is now senior center where it wasn't before. Exactly.

Um, and yes, the population of seniors is increasing greatly quickly. Um, so we will have to expand because even with the last uh lunchon is it the St. Patrick's Day I think it was was sold out within a day and people were on the wait list trying to get in. I mean that whole side of the building was full and we had a great time. I did get in. Yeah. I think uh Katie said the capacity of that is now 200, right? And and it's being filled. It never used to be filled, right?

So, we're going to need more space. We're going to need probably more programming, but yeah, the senior center is wonderful the way they operate, but we're always going to need more. Okay,

Tim. Yeah, sorry I forgot one thing, but first I by no means meant to imply that you don't think about the senior center. I know you all do and it's very important. I just would love to see it on the top five priorities, right? Um and I I don't think a capital project is feasible in the next year, but if there's some other like bite-size piece you feel like you could, you know, help guide us on, I would love that. Okay. Um, and the thing I I did forget that I no one's mentioned tonight, um, is so when we did the inline skate conversion to pickle ball, I believe one of the things we said we would do was evaluate opportunities for other areas in town where we could have a flat surf something that could in some way possibly represent an inline skate place. So if looks like your hand is up and I want to make sure if it's not being investigated that could be part of the work plan for

interestingly we had the same conversation last night as well. It didn't make it on this slide but our budget memo that will be coming to you all does have that item on there for a stick and puck facility because of exactly that reason. Okay. Yeah. Perfect. So we're on page. There were two different documents we were working on last night and that's on the other one. Yep. I officially am done speaking on this agenda. But yes, thank you. Thank you, Council Member Dickson.

Thank you. Um I do want to speak seriously about a topic that I've been joking about for six years, which is multi-use fields. I see it here, you know, continue to land for multi-use fields and soccer fields is one of them. Um I've been a soccer coach for 26 years. um currently still a coach. Boulder has 20 plus public fields. Westminster 20-ish, Broomfield 40-ish, Longmont 20-ish. Zero. We have zero public soccer fields. Zero. I think we have 75 baseball fields. Check my number. It's a little lower than that.

Zero soccer fields. And it's not a soccer field. It's a lacrosse field. It's a field hockey. There's so many things you can do on the field. It's ultimate frisbee. It's so many things. They rent them to Albian Soccer Club for $100 an hour per field. They rent them for three hours a day, every day of the week, nine months a year, and then nine hours a day on the weekends. These are money, not money-making as in it's profitable necessarily, but community park is not making us a ton of money because nobody pays to go there. People actually pay to go to these multi-use fields. Tournaments come in, then people come and visit our restaurants. Families drop their kids off and then go to a coffee shop. Like these these facilities make money for communities. And Westminster has a soccer club. Boulder has a soccer club. Broomfield has a soccer club. Longmont has a soccer club. Lewisville used to have a soccer we don't have soccer fields. We had to play in other places. Um it's it's honest like is honestly offensive to me that we haven't accomplished this and I don't push it that hard because it does feel like a personal thing. Like I play soccer, I coach soccer, my kids play soccer. So it's something I care about. Um, but there are 800 kids trying out at Pleasant View soccer field tonight. 800 children are get I mean there's nowhere else for Lucille resident to go. So I drive 30 minutes three times a week for my kids to practice at Pleasant View soccer field because there are 12 fields there and that's the only place we can play, right? And so I couldn't have my kid be in a local club because there is no such thing as a local club. It it is an

absolute missing piece of what is like quintessential community thing that we don't have. And again, it's not just soccer, right? There are so many other sports that utilize those fields. Um and so I'm glad that continuing to identify land for soccer multi-use

multi-purpose fields is on there. Um, but partnering with Lafayette, partnering with Superior, partnering there, it doesn't even have to be like proper Lewisville, but closer to us. There's a lot of land around us that can be used. And I know there's a lot of shared land, but like yeah, this it is not I will be 18 months, we're not going to have a soccer field, but I will keep pushing this on and off council that we need to have this. And so I'm glad it's on the list, but it it needs to I I would love to see progress. Yeah. On identifying a space.

I'm going to jump in on that. Um and then Council Member Kern. Um I can't ditto that enough. uh my kids who are involved in soccer as well, but I more importantly there are huge numbers of people in Lewisville who have kids and adults too interested in playing soccer. Uh we started as kind of a baseball town and that has been very well represented here. I think I appreciate it very much being on your list. I would put it if if you will if you've got it as second or I guess you've got two of them. I think both of the next two are pretty important priorities. I I think you know and I'll say it that multi-use fields are infinitely more important a priority to this community than a uh inline skating uh facility. And um the fact that we've had some interest in that uh I don't think I pales by comparison to the number of people we've had complaining over decades about soccer fields and multi-purpose fields. And it would be nice to find some way to to manage that. There's, you know, there's a piece of land for it that that is jointly owned. Actually, it's owned by Lafayette. We've never gotten them to be able to

never gotten them to be interested in doing something with. But those, you know, that's a something that maybe in the future um can be done. So, I'm very happy. I mean, yeah, that's music to our ears because that is definitely uh a a huge need for our community and and we're going to have these discussions, don't get me wrong, on when we do budgeting. I I want to keep us That's okay. All right. I I think at least from a couple of council members, and it'll be interesting. There's other comments. Council member Coopermanman and then I said Council Member Kern and then Cooper. Sorry.

Yeah. No, I I yeah, I agree. I'm I'm glad that um Caleb passionately brought it up again, but um I I think the idea of partnering is is appropriate. I mean, we're not the size of Boulder or Longmont, right? So, you combine Lewisville, Lafayette, Superior. Oh, we are then. Um and those are probably like the 800 kids that are trying out. I I mean, I don't know how many of them actually come from Lewisville, but I would imagine it's a lot less than half of them. So, yeah, I think partnering in I that space off of Highway 42 that we have the IGA that Lafayette owns next to the baseball field. I mean, talk about being able to combine access and we're about to build an underpass that will give everybody access like from town. So, if they're going back and forth to things,

um I wouldn't say just about to, Kurt. I'm probably pushing it a little bit, but just about to start. It's tomorrow's project. Don't worry, it'll be done by the end of the year. Um, so yeah, I mean, I think that would be good. And I know um the like other communities. I don't know if if you guys are able to or if it's more of like our staff, Adam, can talk with those other communities to see like where is the favor in this because I think Lafayette would love to have some of that. Now granted, Lewisville might have to pay for more of it, but but you know, they own the land. We bring something else. We can make it work. I one of the conversations I was having with some um uh Boulder County people was around the the conversation that Boulder Valley schools is happening is having about having to close some schools in Lewisville. And there might be opportunities to partner and use that land for something like this for a multi-use field. And so there there I think this conversation is well timed. And I I don't know exactly how involved you guys can be or if it if it's like a a liaison piece or whatever, but I think there are a lot of opportunities for it. Um, and I do I I agree with you. I hear from a lot of community members they would love some spot to get out there and I mean I everybody always looks at that empty bowl behind the rec center and then when you're like, "Well, should it rain?"

Exactly. No, the the record board would I mean you if you task us with a with a direction we will definitely try to achieve it. I think that's probably a staff, right? But yeah, primarily there may be a role that staff could could Okay. Yeah, let me two seconds. Just because they gave the number. Okay.

I I just because they gave the number, I wanted to clarify that there are 800 kids trying out tonight. There are 2,000 kids that play for Albon. Over 150 teams, 2,000 players. Tonight, they have 800 kids at at Pleasant View. So, it's actually 2,000 players. Uh, North Boulder, uh, South Mountain diagonal. You're good. All right. Um, I want to finish this up at 7:15 because we we've got other items on our agenda tonight on the ones unless there is any other um item. Um, I really appreciate this is I hope been a good or at least clarifying discussion.

Yes. Yes, for sure. painful in some ways, you know, but trust us, we have to this is what we signed up for is to make difficult choices and we'll have them coming up and you'll be have it another we definitely appreciate the the dialogue and to know where you're coming from. It helps um on the if we can move to that that areas in which the board would like city council feedback. You know, maybe what we could do here is in the five minutes that we have, maybe council members could could uh suggest, you know, each one of us could perhaps zip through that.

Also, Sam has has been tracking all of your comments and has a summary of the direction that's been provided to date from council in terms of items. So, we could summarize that. Um, one other topic I would just like clarity on as we look at 2027 Col Creek Golf Course fees and to understand if the finance committee is going to take the lead on that discussion, what involvement uh, RAB is going to have on that discussion because it's my understanding that the finance committee is going to have more discussion this year about the proposed fees. And so I just want um as we convey to the golfers as to what this process looks like that we're all on the same page. Thank you.

Um thoughts thoughts from finance committee about that. Yeah. Yeah. Look here here's what I would propose is just given how how it went um for this year. I think finance committee should try and take a first cut at it in terms of trying to establish the broad strokes of what the um B program should look like in terms of memberships. If so, how many discounts for seniors, discounts for youth, discount like sort of think about what are the what are the key features that's interesting

of the the fee structure that um we want to keep the same or or change. Um, but then make sure it does get over to RAB for the important work that you all do and and hearing from golfers and hearing from community. Um, but I I would be a little reluctant just to give you a cold start to go again with the golfers just given the the amount of unhappiness we we had after the last round. Oh, I know. Yeah.

And I certainly don't want to pick that up a second time more more than is absolutely necessary. I know that what with with new staff and management what would help what's been in the past for Rick board if the fees both the loyalty passes and the fee increases come at the same time and come earlier in the year. So maybe July, August, the latest September. we kind of got started on some of it and then October came and then so if we could have those earlier in the year that would be helpful at least for us to provide recommendation I mean on on that are we talking I don't I guess I wasn't foreseeing from this that that's a every year commitment but or a process necessarily but that you get it sort of done this year. Do you foresee that that's a every year process for golf fees because we got a lot of different fees that we're considering?

I don't think it's like a detailed item for finance committee most years. Um I think it will be this year and then um you know ideally we can of come up with something that then we I don't want to say set it and forget it but sort of a structure moving forward that gives everyone sort of predictability sustainable Uh, council member Fate,

I'm wondering with the finance committee, could you come up with a a sliding scale, but in in addition to that, do some kind of gradual increase, annual increase instead of waiting five years and then saying, "Oh, well, now we're going to double it." So, just do a gradual annual increase in fees. Yes, that's something we want to consider.

So, We we so every year the golf course has had a slight increase to answer that. So and that's what they bring back uh management brings that to our rec board and then we discuss it and make a recommendation that does happen on a yearly uh on an annual basis. Does that give you the direction that you need?

Sure mayor if I can repeat the direction I believe I have heard today. So related to the clubhouse, we heard not this year, though you're open to a vision conversation about what we want the golf course to be using that pro plan information and maybe with a 10-year view. Um you also recommended that they watch finance committee upcoming and then you talked a little bit about fundraising and some of those opportunities. Uh what I heard is the opportunity for RAB to evaluate advise on creation of a nonprofit or foundation. Is that accurate there? Seeing nods. I also heard recommendation to evaluate advise on non-resident rate at the recreation center which I think is something you all do annually. I heard a recommendation to review finance committees recommendation on gulp fees and advise on that advise council on budget priorities. Uh interest in the senior center being reflected in the top priorities the top five advise on multi-use including soccer field locations. I also heard that prompt for interest for staff to look at partnership opportunities as an advise on inline skate or stick and putt location opportunities.

Does that consistent with council

will all right? Great. um quickly in the time that we have are there other I guess I'm I'm thinking um well if there are any thoughts about the other questions um I think yeah we've already gone over a little bit I mean the the items for the kind of the work plan I think are what um Sam just described. Yes. Just on the on the last question, I I think we're going to be discussing at some point relatively soon sort of h how we're how we'd like to hear feedback from boards and commissions generally.

So, we may want to put a pin in that one. Um, you know, I think one of our goals is we have all this great volunteer expertise and we want to make sure we're taking full advantage of it. But I I think we're going to give that some thought. Okay. Um across all the boards and commissions and um ideally have an answer for you on that one.

Okay. And then one last can I just ask one question if and I think we kind of have a good direction, but are there any specific items that you would like Rec Rab to work on this year that you see a need other than what we've discussed tonight? If there is, just let Kathy or Adam know, I guess. if something comes up or Diana and so unless there's something that you have specifically like wow let's get the bathroom on the back five I'm for it anything anything like that that you have that we haven't discussed if if you have something we were definitely council member curtain

yeah I don't so the one thing that um again it goes back to my earlier comment about the rec center and like uh residents versus non-residents and that there's not much of a differential in the cost And that peop, one of the comments that I get from people is would there be an appetite like is there an interest and is it feasible? Isn't it need to be feasible? Right? That there's a greater differential like it's less expensive for residents to use the rec center. I mean it it shouldn't feel like oh it was $2 more for you to get into the yoga class as me. So, right. But yeah, so that's what that was the only thing and I didn't know how the rest of the council felt about um RAB taking that on and seeing

yeah if that should change that shift council. Yes. Thumbs up, thumbs sideways, thumbs down. Okay, sounds like that there's there's enough. Okay, that's a good thing. I think one last thing I would say is uh just a a general comment. Um uh the sustainability priorities I think I think staff can work those in and it sounds like that's already occurring.

Okay. Uh, one thing though is um we've certainly heard from community members that um accessibility uh to not just those with physical disabilities but uh with uh cognitive disabilities um is something that you know is a good thing to keep in mind as well and I think staff probably raises that and discusses that but I think that's a good thing to maybe keep in mind as well. It's more of a lens issue. Okay. Any thoughts? Okay. Anything else? Thank you very much. Thank you for your time. All right. Appreciate it.

We appreciate all of the time that you're spending and thoughts that you're bringing. We do with you guys. I know you guys are doing your best. We appreciate it. All right. Thanks, Mayor. the agenda notes. One round of public comment before you all leave. We may want to you may want to stay for the public comment. Um do we have anyone requesting public comment? Anybody? No. Okay, never mind.

Thank you. Add on that. Um, all right. Our next Okay. Um, our next item. You want to take a break, council? Yeah. Why don't we take five?

All right. Um, we are back. Second item, resolution number 42, series 2026, a resolution setting certain water, wastewater, storm water, and other fees, rates, and charges for the city of Lewisville. Um, and I think we have a staff presentation from staff. All right. Uh, evening, mayor and council. Corey Peterson, deputy director of utilities again. Uh, so great segue. Speaking of nice gradual rate increases throughout the years. Uh, this is our annual uh, recommendation for 2026. Uh, so we'll start with just a quick review of 2025. Uh, we had a very wet year. So water revenues were actually offtarget by about 7%. We were about a half million dollars down. Uh water tap fees, we actually had an increase. We were about 14% above our estimate. We brought in about $200,000 more. And then shout out to Ryder that's not here. Uh the interest across all three funds did very well this year. Um we brought in almost half a million dollars more which was 57% above our budget numbers. Uh so what we are proposing for 2026 is a 10% adjustment for water, an 18% for waste water, and a 13% for storm. Uh we just have this graph that shows those past utility rates um going back through 2017. Those impacts translate into an approximately $14 difference for a average monthly residential bill. This is based off of 9,000 gallons. Uh the overall is about a 14% 13.8. So we'd be going from 104 to about 119. So we'll run through the a quick

overview of all of our rates. We've got a surrounding communities comparison. We'll go through our background, talk about some risks to these rates, uh and then what our plan is for the upcoming year to get us to 2027. and then summarize of the 26 rates at the end. So, here is the average. Again, residential rates will be moving from the bottom to about third in place. Um, this puts us in line with some very large communities of Denver, Thornton, and Westminster. Um, you'll also notice that our orange bar, which represents wastewater, starting to really dominate our rates. Um, that is just the driver of that fund trying to catch up to water. um we're really kind of seeing the same expenses out of it. We just haven't seen the same revenue from those two sources. Uh so this is our rate process. Uh we aren't recommending any changes for this year. So that's all the way at the bottom. We still do the financial rate model inhouse. Uh we continue to try to do smoothing the best we can. Our debt service ratios remain consistent at 1.2 two for both water and sewer and a 1.3 for storm water. We use a 90-day capital or a 90-day reserve for operating plus a capital reserve. We don't model any turnback at all. Um and then tap fees are a current year projection uh which can always cause a little bit of challenges uh just as those change and we'll get into that a little bit more. And then we have a 10-year projection uh that includes our asset depreciation. So this is the baseline financial equation. This summarizes the rate model down into its simplest form. So we have our target goals that we're trying to meet. Um for the most part, our on& and M within our expenses are fixed because this is tied to your chemical uses, your staff, your repairs. So there isn't much

variability there. Um tap fees are again based off of a projection. So we take our best guess. So really the only two levers that we have are adjusting our CIPs or our capital projects and then that translates into a month. So rate planning again we continue to use smooth smoothing process where we try to have revenue increases gradually over several years as opposed to a one-time hit. uh that is the just in time uh that that we at least monitor through the process. As unexpected projects pop up, if they're early and hit us like in 26 or 27, our rates tend to shift to that just in time because that's the only way you can get that immediate response. The other piece within our rate is debt service coverage. Um our debt has remained relatively stable. We haven't brought any new debt, so that isn't a major driver for our rates. It hasn't been that way for probably the last four or five years. Um, so we've made a note that we will probably pull that off discussions until it reestablishes itself as another rate driver or if it reestablish itself as driver. So, uh, risks like all finance, uh, rates don't like uncertainty. Um and we have quite a bit of uncertainty coming into this year. So we'll go through each one of these. Um drought is a big impact here. So this is the snow water equivalency for our watershed. The black line is our current year. So you can see as it's trending along here. Um we are reaching the very bottom of the recorded u record that we have. Um it is not a positive thing. It's very mixed message with drought. I'll try not to turn this into a drought conversation. Storage supplies are really positive. What this

indicates is our ability to refill those storage supplies is severely hampered. Future outlook doesn't look any better. This is from the US drought monitoring. So this is the state of Colorado. The dark blob in the left upper corner is our wershed. That's the the Colorado River. that is the most exceptional drought they have on record. So about 21% of the entire state is in that corner. Uh so future outlook of continued drought in and dry conditions is anticipated. Uh like we mentioned early on with last year's revenue being off um the purple dash line is what we project from our water revenues. Uh the bluish solid line is what we've actually received. Um so you can see on any given year we're either off by 10 to 15% one way or the other based off of what's happening with the weather. Um we also list the actual values of revenue there. So you can see it's between a half a million to a million dollars depending on the swing. So that is starting to impact the rate conversation. Uh as those reserves get a little bit smaller, those revenues impacts are are greater. And then just to note at the bottom, wastewater and storm water don't have as much of this variability because they're not weather. Model tap fees is the other risk that we have. Um I've made a very high level projection here at the top of the table. Um, moving from our 25 tap fee projections to 26, we had significant money in 26 and 27 that are is related to the Red Tale Ridge development. Um, since that is a little bit slower in the process, we're not anticipating

receiving the funds that we thought we were in 26. So, we've moved it a little farther out. Um, tap fee modeling is something that is a joint process through community development, finance, and public works. So that new process will occur here in the next couple of months as we get into Q2 and Q3 and that'll really help us drive for the the next adjustment for what we think we'll get in 206. Capital projects is our other risk. Um these are the adjustments that we were proposing in the current CIP that's uh in process and will be coming forward here later this summer and into the fall. Uh grand total we're looking about $4.5 million increase to water and a $3.3 million increase to wastewater. Some of these are brand new projects on the water side. We have some telemetry upgrades, sediment basin repair that are showing zero dollars in the current budget and then the proposed new. Um, also some of these projects are just an adjustment inflation and what we think it'll take to get uh that project accomplished. Couple notes on the wastewater side. The additional wastewater upgrades is a project that has not been defined yet. Um, this is something that could end up aligning with the red tail expansion. Um, so we have it in here, but it has a lot of variability and a lot of unknowns. So again driving that uncertainty that's impacting. Uh the last note is utility billing was in our budget but it didn't make it into the rate model. So we're showing that adjustment there. So included in your budget but not in the rate model. So with all those things uh here's our plan to kind of work through those uncertainties. We'll be reviewing the

cost of service um over the next year to again make sure we're aligning our rate structure. We're also going to be evaluating some revenue um flexibility mitigation components. So this is like increasing the base charge to have a little bit more consistency, but then also making sure we're balancing the tiered structure of the rates so that we're enforcing the conservation aspect. So, um, hopefully there's a little bit of wiggle room in there to to make things balance a little. Uh, tap fee revision, again, like like we said, community development and public works and finance will be doing that this summer. So, we'll see what that looks like. And then our capital projections, we have several large capital projects that are in design right now. So, those will drive some of those changes on what the final outcome ends up being. So, we've got meters that are underway, which is like five million. We've got residuals at North Plant, which is another five million. Um, we've got the admin building, which is 2 million. So, all these projects are in design, and hopefully we'll be able to land those numbers and see if there's any savings or any overages that will continue to impact rates. So for water, the last time you you guys saw rates was uh in 2025 with rate um approval, which was a 6%. We went to finance committee twice in July and then most recently in uh February. So we went up to an eight and a half and then had a 10% recommendation this last go around. So today we're sitting at a 10% for water. wastewater similar. We had a 16% the last time you saw these. Uh we were able to dip a little bit in the perimeter rates and then it went back up to an 18% which is what we're recommending today.

Then storm water, we actually had very little change. So that was 13% all the way across. Um storm water is a little bit of a challenge. It doesn't have a lot of funding in it. So what we really do with water is really saving up for large capital projects. And then we spend it and it drops back down. So there's not as much flexibility in the storm water fund as others. Uh but it's staying healthy because it has a nice consistent rate uh revenue from that. So again, just a reminder of here's the the past utility rates plus the recommendations and then summarizing with once again where we stand as a community kind of our neighboring communities are up towards the top. So again we're down with with some of the larger folks of Ember Thornton Collins.

Thank you. Good presentation. Um, council questions and then we'll take some public comment. Any questions? Yes, council member Coopermanman and then um uh first question on the slide with the list of capital projects. Um if there is a zero under the the current budget um does that mean that project was not included in the six-year CIP? That is correct. Okay.

Yes. So it's either a new project that would fit within the sixyear or since we added the year like uh the Marshall Lake seedmentation 32 project so it would have shown up in the prior CIP request. So it's catching that last year the sixyear CIP. Okay, got it. Um, and then the increases for the other ones, the increases are mostly just like you've gone back looked at that project and said we think it's going to cost more for these reasons. Yeah, a lot of it's just trying to catch up with inflation. Yeah. Also, at the same time, you know, just getting a better understanding of what the project is, making sure you're capturing all the components.

Okay, that's good. Um and then on the slides that show the the cash in the in the fund and the the reserve lines. So um you show the reserve for just the cash but then also the cash plus capital. Right. But the blue lines themselves are just the cash reserves. Correct. Y

okay. And does it make any sense to to look at the what am I trying to say to look at the amount of capital reserve or is is the is our policy that the cash reserve has to be above that line or yeah so that is a total so it's while it says Indian cash reserve that includes the cap okay as well so it's that's both numbers that's total reserve funding very Yeah, clarification in the utility funds there's not like like we have general fund and capital funds a lot of

city discretionary projects and the utility funds the operating and the project. Okay. Um and then we had a a question from a resident about what is driving the sort of continued increase in the storm water rates. So I'm curious about that. Um yeah. Yeah. So there's pretty much two large uh storm water funds that are kind of driving that. Uh there's drainageway 71 which is large on the the books. I want to say it's 1.2 million. And then um there's also um storm drainage improvements tied to Cole Creek Station upstream.

Yeah. is the resident email the one that was also asking about just more naturally built. Yeah. Yeah. We we also did a storm water uh water quality master plan. It's pilot projects uh in the last two years. One of those is at Enclave. One of those is just off of the intersection of Century and uh Palia right there.

Right. Uh, I think the projects turned out great. Also, with the goals of council to keep kind of all the rates lower. We've backed off on uh those those water quality master plan projects. They're not like a need. They're more of a want. So, we can certainly add those types of projects back in, but to keep the whole utility bill lower given wastewater's been climbing, we try to balance. Thank you. I'm actually my question was addressed. Thank you.

Um I asked this um some time ago and it's just uh there is um I'm trying to remember the the agency but it's the um uh help me director core. It's like the flood plane. I mean it's sort of the flood plane authority. Yeah. mile high flood plane. And this is flood control sort of general question. We used to have um at least uh interest in being on their board

and we kind of go back and forth on our opportunities to be on that board between Superior and Lewisville to kind of rep represent smaller communities or at least to put our names in. Um I I think the last conversation you and I had was we do pretty well by them um having somebody on the board is probably not necessary. I don't know whether given some of these rate changes there's any you know if you have any thoughts about whether having somebody on the board there would be useful whether that would have any effect whatsoever. you know, whether we get less money as a result of um or not being on the board would get more with us being on the board. What do you think?

Yeah, I think we have a great working relationship with Mile High. They do a lot of great forward planning and asking the communities for need and then working with the communities to uh time their projects with their cash flows. So, I feel like it's diminishing return for our electeds to sit on that board uh because it's such a great partnership and we'd certainly uh let the council know if that position changed. Good. Thank you. Other questions? Yes, Council Member Kurt.

Great. Thanks. Um appreciate the work and everything that goes into this. I mean, I know it's what you guys do every day, but uh it's still big. There's a lot that goes into this. So, I'm just So, a couple of things. Some of them are questions just more public clarification because I I you guys do a really good job of always pointing out that the rates that we talk about in here are for single family residential. So I would just love if you wouldn't mind very briefly speaking to clarify that there is a different type of billing rate for people who live in apartments. Yeah, apartments or multifamily as it might be called in our race structure is in our commercial building, not in our residential building. Uh, and that'll also be something that we're looking at through uh this summer's work plan is just cost of service equity and seeing if our right now our commercial rate bundles like um commercial, multifamily, city, a couple different classes. We'll probably look at unbundling those so we can do um more granular equity and cost of service. So I think you'll see some benefits to the multifamily if we go that route.

Yeah. Oh, thank you. I'm really glad to hear that you guys are doing that. It's awesome. Um and this tells us what the average is. Do we um have the minimum monthly water bill that somebody has to pay? Uh I mean the base charge if you use zero is around 22 24 bucks. Yeah, that's where we're going to with the 10% adjustment. I think it's 24 something. So and that's it's just the water piece that would change because the waste water and the storm water stay the same. Correct. Correct. It's just the it's just only the water rate that's that fluctuates. Oh, the total minimum monthly bill.

Yeah. What is the total minimum? Cuz like right here we're saying average proposed is 11863. I was curious if the current minimum like mandatory minimum people have to pay when they're on our water what that rate is. Yeah. So, this has some amount of use in it. So, waste water and store would probably stay the same and so yeah, you're you're right around $24 would be the base fee of water.

Okay, good. So, we'll still be under $100 a month then as far as an absolute. people who are either don't have like large outdoor watering spaces or smaller families but are in still in single family residential their theirs is not I mean it's still going up by the 10% but we're keeping it below $100 a month right now

I believe so I don't have those numbers memorized right now we can I'll look them up when we're talking uh I would also just I think this is a good point to remind everyone it's like it's not only about the volumetrics that um people use. So people say, "If I don't use water, if I don't flush a toilet, why am I paying a bill?" Uh there's still a lot of infrastructure to get the water from the mountains down to us and then get it to your house and sitting there for if you want to use it. Uh there's that's not a free cost. That's actually most of the cost. And then the volumetrics are, you know, less at that point. Hence the reason we have our minimums so that everybody is equally contributing to the like the raw cost of having the water available.

Correct. Right. Okay. And then back to just the kind of the rate stability and why do we have these increases? uh the increases has become challenging because of the you know the bouncing around of our revenues and so that we are this summer's work plan will look at raising that base rate so we can stabilize revenues and then in the long term that should help with smoothing but right now it's kind of a short-term pain

and then what I I thought I saw it in here and now I can't find the slide um that oh you know what it was it wasn't on the in the presentation it was actually in some attached documents where it talks about the the usage levels and the rates, how they vary with that. Um, has there been discussion about changing instead of instead of increasing minimums because it's it's such a fun and complicated topic, right? Oh, we had a lot of rain, which is great, but now we don't have enough money to pay for the the infrastructure needs that everybody has to have. And then we also say now we're now we're having less rain. I won't say the d- word and you know not enough rain maybe and so people are using less they're intentionally not watering their lawns and and trying to be as responsible as possible to the big water levels and then that also has an impact on us right because now we're so the people are not using it even though we don't have all the water if there are people who are using lots of water times when it's wet times when it's not wet right rather than increasing that minimum that base. Is there a conversation in increasing the incremental cost to using larger amounts of water?

Yes. Uh we'll be looking at both through the work plan. So that's you have your base fee and we have different tiers like tier one, two, three, or four. Uh so we'll look at our tier structure. We might break that up into uh like right now we go from uh 0 to 5,000 and then 5,000 to 20,000 on your water usage. And so maybe we break that to go zero to five and then like 5 to 12 and then 12 to 20 and then a certain point we can have a higher incentive to not water and and so then there'll be a balance of that will generate more money but less use and we'll try to figure out that balance.

Thank you. I really appreciate you doing that and and looking into those like additional options for that. That's great. Yeah, the minimum fee of water, wastewater, and storm water, we just added up about $51. Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, Dickens.

Uh, apologize for my ignorance. I haven't been on finance committee for a year or two. Um, I'm not seeing anything about commercial properties here. Do they pay the exact same rate? Like there's a lot of examples of what residential like is this just the residential rate or is this the exact same rate as the commercial or do we just do something different? Have we ever moved them differently over time? Can you help me understand the impact on our commercial users? So this is for the average residential bill. Commercial has a different rate. Totally different rate. Totally different rate. It's in uh attachment three in the packet.

Okay. Thanks. And um that's kind of based off again that cost of service equity and how we bundle those different user groups. And so just to kind of repeat when we unbundle, if we do that, if we present to council an unbundled commercial structure and then you have multifamily, commercial irrigation or whatnot, each of those classes will have a different rate based off how based off their impact and usage on the system and the percentage increases are the same for both residential and commercial. Okay. So that that part is the same. Yeah. They just have different starting points. Council

member Cooperman, just one little followup to that. Do you know offhand how our commercial rates w with this increase will compare to other municipalities roughly or or not? Uh yeah. So I didn't get all the way through that analysis. Uh last time we did it, we were towards the bottom on the commercial as well. it as far as I got through it, it was there. And that's something we can follow up to council with with the that graph that shows the commercial rates. Sure. It's it's relative on that community comparison, the commercial and the residential.

One caveat that we always put with that is uh there's a broad range of commercial users. So, it's sometimes hard to get one example, but we do have one that we can use. Um, couple a followup to that. We would like that analysis would be good to get out. Um, and and frankly probably shared with the public too. I think the public and businesses would really appreciate seeing that as well. Um, and I I also, this may be a better question for finance, the finance director, but do you have any um recollection about um what we do um for our consumers when they're having a hard time paying the water bill? Um, and can you speak to that? and that may be something that if you can't I'm I I don't want to put you on the spot, but I'd like to hear more about that.

Yes. So, uh we have a a funding source that goes to Sister Carmen. So, it's as part of overall low-inccome assistance, uh utility billing falls under those sources. Do you have a sense of of how much that's being used for this as opposed to like other I don't remember off the top of my head. Do you remember, Kurt? Yeah, I can chime in. I don't remember the number offhand, but when we do that every year, we set a certain amount of funding that must be used for this versus other items. So, we're very specific there. And if I recall, we upped that funding last year.

Yeah, I think it's important. I mean, we can say this later. Um, well, let me let me say it later. Let's get to public comment first. Uh, unless we've got another comment. We do have questions. One other point on that question which is the finance committee year or two ago moved that program from being city administered to sister Karman and the reason was we had relatively low numbers like 15 or 20 people using the city program and and the feeling was the cost of administering our own utility assistance program um didn't make sense just given that it wasn't super heavily used and that Sister Carmen has has uh much better resources for um sort of providing holistic assistance to folks who might be struggling rather than having to deal with many different programs. Um right, do we have any public comment?

Oh, okay. Um, council comments. I just sort of frame this just in terms of we as a council take this issue very seriously. Um, there are some in our community who sort of say, you know, no big deal to absorb extra fees and that's uh a good thing uh for them. But there are a lot of people who watch this stuff very carefully. Number one, they want to get value. We all want to have value that you are that we're providing. Um but also um for some people it does mean uh a bit more than that. And um I think I I want to say to you know the public generally that we um I have the highest confidence in the public works department and the work that you're doing um that you're trying your very best to keep these rates as they as low as they can be. the smoothing which is an approach we've done for some years now has helped out a lot and that's not an easy thing to ensure. So, I want to appreciate very I really appreciate the staff work on this just over and over uh year after year and I know council was very watching this stuff very closely because our our voters do as well they should other comments and yeah, council member

I would just echo what you just said. I think the staff has done an amazing job and continues to do an amazing job getting all of the information and coming up with ways to smooth it. I love the smoothing of the fees. That's my thing. So, thank you very much. Yes, Council Member Gon. Uh

I really appreciate you, mayor, bringing up um the contributions that the city makes to Sister Carmen to help our residents. And I just I want to point out because it is an attachment to what we're looking at today. It is absolutely and I'm I'm really grateful to staff for making sure this is in here. There is the contact information that will go out in the newest water bill with the rate changers. Phone number is on there for the Sister Carmen organization. And I I really do not I I agree. I do not want our community members to hesitate to call um should these increases create any burden um for them that that they feel uncomfortable with. This is a very private, very confidential way to get assistance. Um, and from everything that we've been presented, especially last year specifically, the Sister Carmen or organization came and presented and discussed, um, they want to make this as easy as possible for our community members. And I just really I can't thank everyone enough for for doing this, for stepping up, for it being just beyond, um, as Council Member Hefner was saying, a senior program that was underutilized, also because the parameters were ridiculously tight. Um, I think that, uh, we did a really good job as a council in opening this up and making these funds available quite frankly for any h household in Lewisville that needs this help. So, appreciate you bringing that up, Mayor. Thanks.

Yes, Council Member Hefner, and then Council Member Cooperman.

Yeah, I I'll be relatively quick. Um, I I'm not wild about double-digit rate increases and I'm I'm hopeful. Um, this isn't something that's going to continue. At the same time, I am I am comforted, pleased, um, happy uh, that we are outperforming most of our neighboring communities and and even outperforming some much larger communities. And I think that's something um this group should take tremendous pride in and and certainly a message that I hope we're getting out there to the public that even though rates are going up there there's you know still lower than most of our close comparators um and you know there are real costs associated with providing what what may be the city's most core core service which is utilities. Um I'm wondering to what extent can you look ahead a little bit to next year? Um you know do do you think we'll be looking at double digit rate increases again or not? Um, and I'm I'm asking that in part because of the the charts, the three charts, um, showing the cash reserves, you know, that like there's this dip down, right, and then everything sorts of look better after that, um, at least in the reserves. And I'm sort of wondering how those might work together or not.

Yeah. So, regrettably, we're looking very similar to what we have this year for next year and the foreseeable year. Um really what that is is everything's frontloaded on our capital. So we're seeing a lot of those expenses up front because we have known uh expenses. As you get farther out into the rate model, there's less things that have been been identified. Um again, there's a lot of uncertainty with this current rate. So um that's why we we kind of pulled out that look ahead is things can move quite substantially on us. And so there's there's potential for large swings in whatever we have for 27.

I would just build on that by saying some of these things that are are frontloaded are things that we've already delayed for many years going back almost to 2019 and 20. And so we've it used to be that inflation was predictively low. Uh and so you could like push things out and and kind of keep up. But like inflation's just not that anymore. And so anything we push out just keeps compounding against us and driving that rate curve up. So um just kind of throwing that out there that it's it's everything's compounding against us. It's more like a a race against time than trying to spread it out and buy time. Okay. Um right. Anybody want to make a motion or wait, we have com we have public comment because we haven't done that yet. Did right. Sorry. Uh lost power on my computer and my mo my mind drifted. All right. So motion

I will I move to approve resolution number 42 series 2026. Second. Okay. Um all in favor? Hi. Thank you.

Oops, excuse me. Next item is discussion direction on potential 2026 ballot questions. Um, do we have a staff presentation on this one? Yes. Um, so Samma, Jenny, and I are going to present on this item. Okay.

Um, so the purpose tonight is to get direction from council on potential 2026 ballot questions. In February, we had a workshop with council and we discussed um the potential to place some items on the 2026 ballot. We brought forward the three items that uh council indicated there was interest. So, historic preservation tax extension, uh, city charter, um, potential amendments, and then local marketing district tax. Um, currently the city has no ballot questions or council races on the 2026 ballot. July 21st is the last meeting for council to pass any non-emergency ordinances relate referring ballot questions. Um, note, we're limited to 10 ballot questions. Um although we recommend a much smaller amount if we are to proceed forward. The next slide is related to timeline for ballot measures. The information we're providing you tonight is really just to get um direction as if you are interested in us exploring this more. If you are, we will bring back information for you to then make a decision as to whether or not you want to place it on the ballot. So any any action you take tonight does not commit us to placing anything on the ballot. Um, with that said, again, we noted the July 24th deadline to coordinate with Boulder County on the election, and then September 4th would be the deadline for ballot content. Um, with these items, we have Taber considerations, which are noted, and again, um, while 10 questions could be placed on the ballot, um, the recommendation would be to reduce that significantly down to three to four potential questions. Moving on to the historic preservation tax. Um, Brighter did a fantastic job at finance committee of giving background related to the historic preservation tax and um, you know, that background. I really

should have Rob up here to to present on this item as he's sitting over there. Um, the background on this is that it was approved via ballot issue in 2008. It was again extended by the voters in 2017. It's a 1/8% of a tax and it expires on December 31st, 2028. So with that expiration date, council could decide to place it on the 2026 ballot or if you want to look at 2027 or even 2028 if you want to um make it super dramatic as to whether or not it is extended. Uh since 2016, I've awarded over $3.8 8 million in grants to 40 unique recipients of over $45,000 in pre-landarking assessments and over $1.1 million in funding for historical museum and then the voluntary local landmark program. So the recommendation is if council's interested in pursuing a potential ballot question for the historic preservation tax extension, we recommend council create an historical preservation task force similar to what you did with the open space and parks task force. Um because of the short timeline, we would recommend that um council appoint these members. And so it' be city council member or members, historical preservation committee members, historical museum board members, a member of the public or a local architect familiar with the program, other stakeholders, and then the community development and cultural services director. With that said, it is such a short time frame, we would not really have the ability to go out and solicit um interest in participating on this um this task force. And so we would be requesting if council to identify folks to fill these roles and then bring that forward so that we could have coordinated meetings in May and then bring that back to council. So the direction needed tonight is does council

wish to proceed with consideration of a potential historic preservation tax extension ballot question. Do you support creation of a task force and if yes as recommended in terms of the makeup of the task force? I don't know if you want to have the discussion now or if you would like us to continue on with the presentation related to this item and then have council discussion. There will be one round of public comment. So, um, you mean just talking about the historical preservation tax alone? Right. If you want to provide direction now or do you want to wait until you get public comment before you do? I I think I'd rather wait to get public comment so we can make sure to get through and then we'll we'll come back because this is obviously a really important one.

Sounds good. Next, Samma will discuss the uh potential city charter amendments.

Great. Thank you, city manager. Um, city clerk Tenny Klein is also here and has information on this. So, a little bit of background. In 1902, Colorado authorized home rule governance. In 2001, Lewisville started the process and adopted a home rule charter that was approved by voters. Amendments have been done. In 2004, I believe that one was resident initiated. And in 2009, so there's some history of amendments here. There are a variety of possible amendments. This is a short list. Council could have other things on their mind, but one of them is when council takes office based on the current election procedures. Right now, our charter says um I believe it is after the the first Tuesday after the election. Results aren't always certified or final at this point in time. We'd like to make it till after certification. We could align authorized topics for executive sessions with the state. We could align initiative and referendum signature requirements with surrounding communities. Can add a review and comment requirement for initiatives and referendums. And this would be a moment to allow the people recommending referendums to meet with staff and for staff to understand things and for some conversation to happen there as they develop their questions. Um, we could update outdated language such as changing citizen to resident or he she to they. And we could clarify document availability locations such as things are available on the website. We would recommend given that you want to be thoughtful in how many questions you put if council does consider moving forward with this, you consider prioritizing current elective practices, initiative and referendum alignment with neighboring communities, an executive session alignment with state meeting law. Of course, council could progress some or all of these for the 26th ballot. You could have a list of things that you do at other ballots. Some communities develop a list of charter amendments and do a couple each year. That's something that some communities do. You could also identify something different that's not in this list. For example, Lewisville has a fairly restrictive meeting location requirement

for city council. That's something that you could seek to add flexibility for. And what we'll be looking for on charter amendments tonight is does council wish to pursue any of these amendments and if yes, which ones? And then we'll develop more information as this progresses.

All right. Next, we're going to cover the local marketing district tax. Um, so the local marketing district tax would impose a marketing promotion tax on the rental of rooms and accommodations that are less than 30 days. This would apply to short-term rentals, to hotel stays within Louisville. The revenue is to be used for advertising, marketing, promoting tourism, workforce recruitment, and visitor experience enhancements. Um, in the presentation, we have a slide related to the formation. There is a pretty significant process in terms of creating the local marketing district tax and then once it is created if it's approved um the administration is uh somewhat removed from the city as well. It relies on community partners for administration. Currently the city has a lodging tax that was approved by voters in 2002. It's currently at 3% and since January 1st, 2003, it's generated approximately $ 8.5 million with $47,000 collected in 2025. This would be in addition to the sales use tax. Um, at this point in time, staff is not recommending to move forward with a local marketing district tax based upon what's required for the formation. If there was interest in proceeding with this, we would recommend to evaluate this for a upcoming election. Alternatively, council could give direction to look at increasing the lodging tax. Um, that is a much more simplified process. It's more simplified in terms of how the funds could be utilized. The current lodging tax, uh, the funds are to go towards, um, cultural services and the museum. Um, so if we were to proceed with that, staff would also recommend identifying how the funding could be used so the voters would know what um the funding could be utilized for. You could leave it more

generic and see how um the voters uh vote. With that, that covers um the potential items unless council has other items that you would like us to explore and we can go back to um discussion and direction. Why don't we take any questions about the presentation from council members and get some public comment here? Any? Yes, council member Coopermanman. Uh just one little question. Do we know in other jurisdictions is it typical to seat a council member after certification or do they other places also have something like we have in our charter current?

I'll let city clerk Klein take that one. It is actually customary for it to be after certification so you don't run into an issue with not knowing who the seat belongs to. Good. Other questions?

It just takes so long sometimes to get the certification. I I I appreciate though that that the difficulty of of doing it. Um, other questions? I I had a question about the charter amendments. Um, I had wondered this before. It are the are the charter amendments each separate, you know, when you're dealing with a separate topic? Yes, we would recommend they each be a separate topic. Fair enough. Um, okay. Other questions? Otherwise, we'll take public comment. Do we have anybody sign up for public comment? Tanya Samaru

as usual three minutes. Um you've done public comment before so I won't I won't go through the whole spiel.

Okay. Any Samaru um I wanted to speak about charter amendments and advocate strongly for increasing the number of signatures needed to bring an initiative or a voter initiative or referendum forward. Um, this is something I, you know, after the 300 301 um, recent election, um, residents are sick to death of how easy it is to get things on the ballot. And, um, you know, this is a really nasty, contentious election where a lot of people report they were lied to when they they were approached. Would you like to support affordable housing? Sign this. And um it was a really nasty campaign um that was very upsetting to people. Um this is not a place where we have a lot of news. So the all you you hear word of mouth and you hear things on social media and once misinformation is out there. It's really hard to bring it back. When these things happen, you as council typically don't say much. The city government is kind of to some degree constrained. So it's just up to residents to sit there and duke it out. Um, I want to encourage council to consider limits that are at least 7.5% for both. The thing is that in Lewisville, we have more process than other cities. Like to get, you know, to construct a new neighborhood here, there is an absurd amount of process. And by the time you go through all that, it shouldn't be so easy for people to revisit it. or it seems like perhaps that should be proportional to the fact that we have so much process. If you have a really low threshold, it's easy to get signatures. Um it makes it easier for something that has a low chance of passing to get on the ballot. And when something like that gets on the ballot, it's stressful for everybody. It was really stressful for the community this this whole last election. Um, if you

have something that, let's say you have some crazy cowboy council, they don't listen to anyone, no one wants to recall them, and then they pass something that's massively unpopular. It's going to be very easy to get those signatures, to get a higher number of signatures. There's a balance here. Like, these things are protected in the Colorado Constitution and they're part of our way of government in Colorado, but it needs to be balanced. Think about how much process we have, how many opportunities for feedback we have here, and are we just going to bypass our whole elected government and system with, you know, a bunch of crappy misinformation in the future? This really throws things into disarray. Um, I think you need to think about the impact of that on the community and come up with a better balance. Please increase, please put it to the voters to increase those limits. People feel strongly about this. Thank you. Thank you, Tanya. Other comments?

Okay. Uh, back to council um at the suggestion of um the city manager that perhaps we should start with the historical preservation tax and talk a little bit about some of the thoughts um there. Um just pulling that stuff back up. Um, I think the recommendation uh was a good one for having a kind of I'll just speak for myself, a kind of um uh task force like we did um for open space a couple of years ago um because that um helped to get good information from the public. Um I think we had a really highly motivated chair of that um uh task force and it was a very um well done. Um and I think the you know you've included in that a pretty good group but um I'm interested in one whether uh I mean I suppose there's a big question of whether anybody wants to put it on the ballot at all this year and there's a question you know we can decide that but if there if we want to do that do we want to to have a commission or not and then we can talk a little bit more about doing it. Yes, Council Member Her.

So, I I'll share my view, which is it it's pretty essential to have a task force of some kind um to to figure out the policy details of of what we're um putting on the ballot. The tax does two pretty different things. One is fund the museum and one is provide grant funding for historic preservation. And so I think we need to give or due consideration to to what goes on the ballot to best fulfill those two goals. The the only amendment I would make to the staff recommendations and I think we need to balance out the task force a little bit with folks who are not necessarily historic preservation types. Um and in particular people who either don't live in in Oldtown or or have a business in Oldtown. um because we ask all of this all of the city to pay this tax, but it benefits a relatively small geographic portion of the city. And so I think we we need to make sure we have representation from folks who are essentially just being asked to pay who will never probably receive any of the grant money. Um and just make sure that perspective is accounted for. And I think we've gotten some emails over the last few days um you know questioning and and I'm not subscribing to this view but questioning you know does it really make sense to continue to have this tax to fund a small number of either private homeowners or private businesses in Oldtown and just give give consideration to that question. But I think sorry last point 20 2026 is my preference like I think we can do the task force um relatively efficiently. I think the group of us can come up with appointees and get something on the ballot with plenty of runway left before the tax expires. Um especially because it's our our funding source for the museum and it would be a it would be tragic um if we

endangered that others. Yes. May pretend and then council member

Thank you. Um, so I know the intention tonight is not to go into detail in these things. Um, answer the questions that are up there. So I will say like I think council member Hefner nicely summarized um where I think is a reasonable direction in timeline. Um, and I'll just second what he said. Yeah, I actually appreciate that because that was going to be my comment too is that we really make sure that um the the portion of the community that does not and I think it's actually a larger portion of the community that does not get to participate in this program and that should be maybe the measure of representation. Um so it's equal people who are being represented are not like 50% from downtown and and 50% not when it's not the the spread of the the population. Um I would like to see that kind of a balance. Uh but I also was hoping and I think there might be some in here is the discussion around you know do we want to change like how much money that is needed to the museum open to those kinds of conversations. Um and you know I'm I'm very particularly interested in hearing from staff what that what that looks like um where because we've heard some concerns and I I I would appreciate not only that detail being given to a task force but coming to us so that it helps us to inform our decisions. Thank you. Other comments? Council member Cooperman.

Yeah. Um I very much agree with um the perspective that council member Hefner shared. Um I mean the one thing u I am wondering about is you know is basically the year that we might run um an extension. Um, I I don't feel strongly about this year, but I also I don't really I don't think I know all the arguments for why maybe this year is best or not. Um, so I'd be interested in hearing just a little bit from staff about that, but also if you want to weigh in or

Yeah, my view is just we we want to we don't want to run out of time, right? You don't want to be doing this in 28. If you do it in 27 and it doesn't pass, it puts an awful lot of pressure on 28 and and maybe maybe you have to be sort of more more limited or or circumspect in what you propose. I think if we do it in 26, you know, I think we can maybe put something a little more creative to the voters and if it is rejected, we know we still have 27 to go back and try again before we're in like a total crisis. That that's my thinking at least. staff, do you have thoughts?

Sure, I can add a little bit, too. And I think there's pros and cons to all of the options, but oftentimes organizations will run want to run ballot questions when they maybe don't have counsel on the ballot because having council members running for election while you have other ballot issues can just add to the silly season of elections. Um, and then 2028 would be the last year. It's also a presidential election, so it'll be a very busy ballot. Do we have consensus that we want to go forward with putting the tax on there this year? Yeah. Council member Dickensy.

Yeah. No, I generally agree with everything. I think if you go to the slide about potential board structure again like I I I like the idea of, you know, members of the public or other stakeholders being more diverse. I mean, I think a council member, a historic preservation committee member, historic museum. You're going to have more people that are historic minded, but they may not live in this. I mean, those people may not live in that area or anything, but I, you know, I don't think we're going to necessarily have 10 members from the public on here, right? You maybe one or two. I I don't know what the design is. That would be something we would talk about later, right? Is the actual like makeup of how many people we want. and you know we don't want a board of 15 or not board but you know what I mean task force of 15 but yeah I generally agree and I hadn't really thought of it that way I mean partly I think because I live downtown I'm just surrounded by it but it's like yeah the historic area is down here and so like people care a lot about it but you're right we all pay into it and the money gets spent in one part of town right and we don't really have lots of examples other examples of that kind of thing where you know like we all pitch in and it gets spent on Harper Lake now you know we all pitch in and it It's been an open space. There's very little open space in downtown Louisville. Um, but I think to your point, I I do I do like the idea of um having other people weigh in that aren't personally benefiting as much. I think it's really smart. Um, yeah, generally I I I do concur that 2026 would be best year to do it.

So, if this progresses, we would be bringing this forward next Tuesday for designation of the task force. Um, one of the things I guess looking at this we can probably provide some additional direction. I think it'd be a good thing to have two council members just because if we're if they're going to have meetings there may be times when I mean having two council members is a good thing generally I think but but also having two council members is good in case somebody can't be at one and this is going to be compressed schedule because of the need to get information to you. So, and we can we don't have to decide today who who might that be, but that's um um I think historical preservation committee. I would I don't think we need more than one person from historical preservation. Um uh h historical museum board. That might be a good thing to have one person. Um I don't know about the the architect or I mean that might be a good one too because that's you know something we have on the committee. I think st other stakeholders I I I like the idea of the community either somebody from community development who works on historical preservation stuff might be good and cultural services might be good. Yeah.

Would it would it be worthwhile other stakeholders too? Yeah. with other stakeholders maybe to gauge somebody who's part of um the chamber like so there's like a business conversation because we do this for businesses it's not just residents I mean that's that's an idea to get a perspective and maybe we look at it from like you know people who are engaged with them but also perhaps a business owner but somebody who doesn't own a historic spot I mean

yeah and I can't remember how many were on the task force the last time there were It seemed like a lot actually. Um, but I think you know you could have as far as other stakeholder I mean that's a real it's a good suggestion I think for one stakeholder and you could have two you know you could have two people um other citizens at least one of whom is outside of you know who's in W three or W two. What do you think?

I just have I actually have a question for everyone. Um, if we were not if we if we just wanted to keep the tax, make no changes, would all of you still want to do a task force if we were just going to propose that we just renew this or are we saying let's do this work because we would like to see a change to the program to the tax. Council member Dickens.

Yeah, I would say it needs to be looked at. I mean, it, you know, we're talking about potentially $10 million in historic preservation money over that next 10-year period. Um, and not $10 million worth of, you know, asks typically coming through in a So, I think there are some really cool creative ways, maybe funding a museum remodel that they've wanted really badly. Maybe like I think there are some really creative things that could potentially done. maybe making the area bigger, maybe making the eligible um concepts bigger, right? So, I think there there are some big questions on it's a lot of money or it's half as much money, right? Like that's a big choice to like decrease the tax or all those things. That's what I was going to ask.

So, I think there's there's enough there's enough meat there that you'd probably want a task force to ask those questions. That's that's what I was getting at too is if we were interested in making sure that it wasn't just a conversation about the renewal and the and keeping things like the same rate but potentially reducing the rate changing it's I just wanted to make sure that everybody wanted the task force to talk about all of those different optional things and that because that staff probably needs that direction to ask them to focus on that. Council member, another consideration that this task force could come up with is do we renew it for 10 years or do we make it in perpetuity?

No. That's a good question. The task force in the interest of of not taking too too long to get in the weeds, we can, you know, I think there's you've got some um ideas. I think that would be really good. Then next week we can talk, you know, talk amongst yourselves about if you'd like to be the people on that committee and we'll see who um I think Kevin two will be would be good. But what what um as far as other stakeholders because that's one you talked about one being somebody in the chamber perhaps or mayor if I may I think we also heard other stakeholders from other perspectives within the city who may not be currently tied to downtown or

historic. Absolutely. So, I think with what we have, we can kind of put together an updated what this could look like. Yeah. No, I think that's good. I The question was more how many should we have? I think that's a bit of that's a good direction to be able to give to you. And if we're only talking about one of the others, um you know that each one well two council members and then the others are kind of one person. Um, how many stakeholders do we want? Do we have an idea? Yeah,

I I don't necessarily have an exact number in mind, but I'm confident with staff managing those meetings, they will likely have a magic number they'll land on where they think, you know, it's a good size to have a productive conversation, but capture the amount of background and ideas that we want to capture. So, I I can't say the the cut off right now. Yeah, I guess I would raise an issue. I staff is in my view on a tax issue staff is not leading those conversations of a task force, right? I think that would be a

my suggestion would be eight plus the two staff members. So that' be two council members, historic preservation committee member, historical museum board member, an architect, a member of the chamber, and then that would be two other public members that could represent the non non-utilization. Yeah. Non-down. Um if you get too much larger than that, it just becomes really unruly to try to manage. And so I think eight plus the two staff members. Yeah. I mean, yeah. Go ahead,

Cooper. Um maybe depending I don't know uh you know depending on which members of those committee and board we select depending on where they live that might influence where the other stakeholders are from. I don't know. I you're suggesting if those are people that don't live in downtown maybe the other stakeholders can be in downtown. I don't know. Maybe

I my my my thought would be if you're on the historic preservation committee, it doesn't matter where you live, you have a very historic preservation mind and you've already kind of stepped up into that role because that's your I think what this is to there are quite a few people who like I mean thousands of people right that are paying into this that will never take advantage that are don't live in that part of town. they're not part of that preservation world. Um, they might love the museum and say, "Oh my gosh, like this is absolutely we had no idea. Thank you for bringing this knowledge to us from a staff perspective. Now I understand why we have to do this." But I think if you're already on one of those two boards or committees, it kind of doesn't matter what part of town you're in.

I think that's selling I I I think with respect, I think that may be selling people in that community short. I mean, we're not going to get rid of this tax. I don't think that's not the intent. So I think and I think a person on a historical preservation committee will be um circumspect about all of the issues that we've dealt with. I wouldn't count on them to be ringingers for um expanding everything on there if that's the implication. Um but I I I guess I mean it seems like that's a fine the way you just described it seems fine. Are we talking about somebody from community development and a cultural service separate person? Okay.

Correct. Yeah. I think there's because of the entressed time schedule, it's going to be a very intensive learning moment for these task force members before they can be asked to make these decisions pretty quickly to recommend something to council. Yeah. And you you want to propose a schedule also when you come back to us? We will. Okay. Good. Right. Um let me go to the others. We just take them. You want to go to city charter first? Chris, can we stick with tax and like do the charter things last? So to do the next tax item. Sure, that's fine. Thank you.

I was trying to go in order, but I guess yeah, the next one's a tax one. Um, is there well is there interest in doing a local marketing uh district and uh a tax relating to that? Is that something that is of interest? Is it the right year to do that? Is it a better year to do something else with respect to that? Yes.

Um, I like the city manager giving us some additional options here. I think with Sundance on the horizon and the additional expected lodging that we're going to have, I really like the idea of enhancing our lodging tax and having portion of that tax be utilized for this purpose.

Good. Good. Yes, um, is there any risk to having two tax items on one ballot issue? Like, could this somehow impact, even though historic isn't new, it's continuing, could it put at risk the historic one?

There is the potential for that because it is a tax. Um, I think what's going to set, if we were to increase the lodging tax, set that make that different is that that would apply to visitors coming to Lewisville versus it would not apply to residents in Lewisville. And so, you know, if it was a tax that was going to apply to residents, it might it might have a larger impact. Um, we can bring forward different options and you can always decide not to proceed. So we could bring forward like here's different percentages that you could consider and consider, you know, comparison to our surrounding communities. So you can see where our lodging tax compares to surrounding communities. We can bring that forward. You can still decide to hold off. You could decide to proceed, but we can provide you some information.

Okay, that's helpful. Thank you, Council Member Raptor.

I'll just register. I'm a little skeptical of this idea, at least where it sits now. I think if we if for me if I saw support coming forward from the chamber or from the hotels or from some part of the business community saying this this marketing district tax or market lodging tax to support a marketing effort is what we really need to put Lewis on the map. I think I could I'm certainly open to being persuaded. The thing that comes to mind for me is Sundance is, you know, a couple weeks out of the year leaving the other 50 weeks when it's it's people staying in the hotel to visit their family or it's people staying in the hotel because they have a loved one at the hospital or it's people staying in the whatever the case may be. Um, it does impose more costs on lots of different kinds of people, not just uh leisure travelers coming for the film festival. And I just think we need to be even though they don't vote for us, we we need to be mindful about um considering this as sort of a source of free money or anything like that, which I don't think is what is being proposed. Um but until I see sort of more of the the need for the marketing district idea, I think I'll be a little bit skeptical about this one. Council member Dick and

maybe that request isn't super official but I h I have heard I've had a direct conversation with the director of the chamber as like oh my god this would be amazing what an like this is a huge deal. So, um, she's not here tonight, uh, Julie Mar to Miller to represent that, but, um, I have spoken to her months ago when this idea was first like floated. And, um, I don't know if it was her idea or same manager's idea or someone else's idea, but she called me and like, "Is this the thing you guys are seriously thinking about? Like, this would be amazing. We have so many things we could do that money. We're so like so excited about marketing the whole town." So, they're very excited about potentially using, you know, dollars to um do more like marketing of Lewisville as a whole, all the business, you know, not the downtown business association, the chamber um and marketing all of all of Lewisville. So, I know that is a is a desire to your point. I think it is um good to to think about like the people who do end up paying this tax, right? Um and I think it is kind of like, oh, cool. It's just visitors. It doesn't matter. But, you know, visitors are real people, too. Um but I you know I think comparing it to what is around us and and it is you know it doesn't hurt the hotels directly I mean someone if it was exorbitant like 20% lodging tax then it's like okay people aren't going to want to stay at our hotels but they don't lose money they're not paying it like they're collecting it and remitting it. So I think it's a I think it is a good source of revenue and with um Sundance coming a spike in that revenue and you know I'd really be excited about talking about the ways in which we use it and specifically I think a lodging tax should be focused at least partially towards you know housing needs and affordable housing and other things. So I'm excited about kind of pairing those two things not entirely but certainly uh partially. Um, and yeah, I think about the people who are going to rent their houses out and make $2,000, $5,000, $10,000, collecting a lot more lodging tax there

that benefits the whole city, I think is a positive as well. Um, but but yeah, I'm this isn't like I'm not huge passion over this. I think it sounds like the marketing taxes is too complicated and maybe more directly what we're actually looking for, but very complicated. So, I kind of like this. Let's just do a lodging tax and then we can use some on marketing, we can use some on housing, we can use some. So, I like the idea of at least moving forward with it. Maybe we decide ultimately not to, but I like I like pursuing it. I just want to clarify, we're looking at increasing the current lodging tax, not creating a local marketing district. We're about to Yeah,

I'm about to ask for thumbs up on that. Is is the consensus of the group not to seek uh really staff to work up anything on the local marketing district? I mean, is that fair? Okay. And do council want to get some options on increasing the lodging tax uh from staff? How that might work? Is that is there any more that I mean no

some Yes. No. Yeah, sort of mostly. Yes. So, why don't you bring us something to consider and we'll roll it around. Thank you. Uh, now we're ready for charter amendments unless there's another tax amendment. Do we have somebody think of another tax amendment?

All right. So, charter amendments. Uh first of all, anybody have any interest in any of the charter amendments that were discussed? Okay. So, why don't we run through them? Um I think the one Well, let's and Whoa, we got a whole bunch. Yeah. All right. Um the election process one was I think most people were nodding their heads about that one. That one seemed like a smart one. So, okay. um aligning authorized topics for executive session with state open meetings laws. People comfortable with proposing that. And I mean, we're going to have some discussions of these publicly before we put anything on the ballot. It's all we're asking for is what council right now is sort of interested in pursuing. Yes. When you say what council's interested in pursuing like learning more about

and determining if we want to put on the Okay. Yeah. Council member Coopermanman, Council Member Dickson.

Yeah. I don't I'm not sure about that second one on executive sessions. Um, I guess in particular I'm wondering I think it'd be nice to see very explicitly sort of a comparison like this would be the difference or could be the difference. Um, but um, sorry, what was I going to say? Um, the other thing I think would be nice would be if if people have examples like in the past like oh there was this thing that came up that we had to discuss in the open chamber but we would have preferred to discuss in executive session. I think that'd be helpful for me to get a sense for.

Um I mean my I think my main hesitancy is I mean you I think we if we're having more possible topics it's a little bit less transparent and because we're not discussing those things in the open, right? At least not at first. Um and so that's that's why I'm a little bit hesitant.

Yes, Council Member Dickinson. I just kind of wanted to echo Mayor Prom's comment that sometimes I get like excited about talking about something, but that doesn't mean I'm excited about passing that thing, right? And so I don't want those things to be misconstrued. And so I appreciate you commenting on that is I think these are I think it's good to talk about all of these. That doesn't mean tonight we're voting that we want all six of these out there, but like yeah, I I I would like to talk about every one of these. I think some of them are super light lift, some of them are a much bigger deal, but I'd like to talk about all of them and then maybe we narrow it down to three, four, five, six or them all or whatever. But I I like all of them.

Yeah, it's in some ways it's really voting to say no, we don't want to talk about this one at all.

Uh as much as anything. Um although some of them may have some twists or turns on them that we want to kind of guide the direction here. Um, but are people comfortable with knowing more about executive session alignment? Are you all fine with that? At least knowing more about it, having a discussion. Um, the next uh one is align initiative and referendum signature requirements with surrounding communities. Um, you know, how are people Yeah. Okay.

I think that's generally Yes. Um, I I would say about that one, the only thing I would say about that one is I don't think it's the surrounding communities that's necessarily the driver. I think it's just I think we make up our own minds about what we like one factor in that calculus could be what other communities are doing, but I don't know that um and I also think it might this is what I would also say in terms of direction. I'd like to know what not just our surrounding communities do. And I think that's necessarily the issue at all. It's like what is what a communities what does Golden do? Golden's similar size to us. They may not be in the same community, but it'd be interesting if if it were, you know, relatively easy to get that information just to pull it and see how wide a range there is for that because that's I think that may be useful for us too. What do you think? Okay. So, we'll do that uh for further discussion. Add a ref a review and comment requirement for initiatives and referenda. Oh my gosh. Yes, says one council member. Um that was discussed in the packet. Um and I I think that I mean is that are people wanting that to come forward? think the explanation of why that's important will be useful because I think people might say whoa wait we don't want you know we don't want somebody throwing cold water on a referendum or initiative thing I think there's some policy reasons why that's a good one to to have so right so we're comfortable with that all right uh updated council language citizen resident all that kind of stuff there may be are there others that if there are others let us No, you know,

you're from priority. I was just going to say I don't think that this is where staff should be putting off other projects of high priority to put time into this, but I think if it's something that's an easy lift. I also think that specifically with some of these, we might want to make sure what document we're updating and it is not just a blanket, especially with citizen and resident. Okay. Well, do we want to not do that one? We do. I I think this kind of is like having the conversation, but I I would prioritize it as a much I would agree with council member Havner. It's just priority

when they're thumbs up tonight. Nobody is saying they are for or against or whatever. They're not saying whether it's higher priority or not. We're just I mean I think both of those things pretty important. I would say Jenny's already done a lot of the research on this. There's 15 instances where citizen would be changed to resident and four occurrences where he she would be changed to they. Right. Um the last one's clarify document availability and locations. I boy I want to defer to the city clerk on that one. Um other thoughts. Okay. Are

24-hour access? Look, you just but prior charter changes for now related. No. Uh, all right. Is there any others? We didn't talk about all of those. Um, and that's good. We'll take public comment in just a I do have one suggestion. Yeah. So, uh, and if I missed it, sorry, but, uh, we were talking about maybe one of the other amendments would be around where our meetings can be held. We have some restrictions that that do not allow us to meet anywhere but here in the city own

and it's the and it's the language that is very specific to that because there are public places that we could be holding and it would be very appropriate like for example our meeting Monday with the superior council has to be done here we can't go there just thought I would so that's why I think like I'm just saying it's for conversation so that's why you know is this one of the things that we want to look at practically changing because some of these things are just like not practical to the way that everybody functions in the world today. So, well, and there are community rooms around the city. Um, I mean, you know, there's a lot of different little questions which I'm sure staff can pose to us for discussion on that. But,

one other example of that is when doing like business speech, then we want to make it a actual, you know, public meeting so more people can be there like, oh, well, now we can't have it at an interesting place. it has to so it kind of ruins the meeting. And so I think that's just one concrete example of like, oh my goodness, why can't we just post where this unique meeting is? So I think I think that would be a good adjustment given the city's space limitations. It's a nice way to encourage um efficient use of space around the city. Um and I am reminded that we've already taken public comment, so we won't have public comment. Sorry. Um,

yep. Others others other than that. So that that was a nice expansion of that. I think it's kind of the last one or an additional one, however you choose. Okay. So that's that. And let's see. I think that's it. All right. Uh if there is nothing I actually just have a question for staff as to when you think you mentioned the the task force piece for the for the tax the historic tax you're going to bring to us next week. What is the timeline? Do you think that these others I mean are we are they similarly quick?

You know we've talked about having a June meeting to discuss these. We need to look at your calendar, but based on the election timeline, we'd like to have a June meeting so that we can get very clear direction and you can make ordinance decisions should you progress any of these in July and we can meet that calendar deadline because we have to commit in July to Boulder County if we're coordinating an election and we do want to coordinate the election. It costs a lot more to even run a special election.

Absolutely. No. Um, another I guess a question in that is if uh please have a date in mind in June that we're talking about because we're if we're doing a task force there really isn't much time. There's basically May and maybe something in June. So yes, very tight timeline preset maybe two meetings to be very intensive with the task force. Good. Great. right now our June 16th meeting we really don't have um much scheduled for the agenda. Okay, that's that's a good thought. Um I think we're ready to entertain motion to adjourn. So moved.

Second. All in favor? I any opposed? Thank you very much.