Council - Regular Meeting

I call to order the city of Glenwood Springs city council meeting for March 19th, 2026. Good evening everyone. This is our regular meeting for the second part of the month. And Ryan, would you please take roll call? Mayor Dame here, Mayor Prom Zalinski, Councelor Townsley, Councelor Schmall, Councelor Wymer, Councelor Smith is the microphone. Yeah, I'll have to go back since Steve just moved. Do you want to tell again? I My fault. I thought his name tag was up front. No, I I can go back and do it. It's just going to take a couple minutes.

Okay. Would it be easier? Or or should we just have him? Yeah. Sorry, Steve. I was misinformed. Never mind. It's all good. Now you don't have to sit next to Mitch. That's That's what wants more space. That's right.

I can't. I'm kind of stuck. So, um, changes to the agenda. First from council. If I see none, there's a small change tonight. Actually, there's two. and we're going to move through one with a motion and the other one actually as well. I would like to move um item nine, the charter commission. And I know Mr. Banks has showed up, so thank you very much for being here, but I feel like we owe it to the chairperson of that charter commission to also be able to be here. And he sent us notification earlier tonight that he had an emergency that he can't make it. So I would entertain a motion to move the charter commission uh item to the first meeting in April.

Yes, he did request it. The [clears throat] chair the chairperson did request. Correct. So entertaining a motion. Uh Mayor Prom Solinski, I second your motion. No, you have to make the motion. Oh, I have you enterain. Okay. I thought you just moved. I move that we move continue move the charter commission item number nine to the April 1st meeting the first meeting in April which is what the the third or so or second or whatever it is. Okay. Excellent. Thank you. We have a motion to move this item and councelor Wymer. Second

and a second. Uh call for the question. Yes, Councelor Townsley. Yes, Mayor Prom Zalinsky. Yes, Mayor Dame. Yes, Councelor Wymer. Yes, Councelor Schmall. No, Councelor Smith. It passes 51.

Right. Thank you. That was one change. And let's see. The other change that I'd like to just get done and over with is planning file. Um Oh, interesting. ARC 0000130 2025 and it's item 11. Uh the applicant requested for continuence uh to the April 2nd meeting. So I am also entertaining a motion in that. Just here if you need me. Okay. If we have any questions we can ask Trent but at this point motion please. Mayor Pro Tim Solinski. Yep. Somehow I don't know what's going on there. Yeah. Okay.

All right. So, I I move that we um honor the request from the applicant to move planning file ARC-0000130-25 2025 um to for continuance on April 2nd. Excellent. Thank you. Looking for a second. Council second. And a second. Um any discussion on this? But it's a clear request from the applicant, so it shouldn't be a big deal. But councelor Small,

are there are there implications to timing of the application and approval process based on this postponement? No. And the benefit of continuing tonight means that we would not need to read that item that was scheduled for tonight previously. Okay. Thank you. Any other discussion? See none, I'll call for the question. It's unanimous. It passes.

Right. Thank you. That was it for changes. We have any um conflict of interests uh from on council side tonight. We'll see none. Good. will move into the uh citizens of hearing before council for items that are not on the agenda. Now, most of you are here for an item. I think it is item eight, uh the public update for the special use permit. So, if you're here for this, I have your names on the list here, which is great. You can always add your name or you can just raise your hand when I call. Uh other than that, anybody here for items that are not on the agenda? Okay, we'll see none. I will close the public portion for those three minutes and we'll move into item number five, council announcements. Council, please.

Just push the microphone button on the bottom. Yep. There you go, Councelor Smith.

Thank you. Uh the um Workforce Housing Advisory Board, as it's still called, uh met on March 10th, uh including a a cadre of new members. So, the board is really enlivened with even more talent. uh they had some very hopeful discussions on several items, but in particular made a recommendation regarding a novel housing development proposal that I think will eventually work its way through either combination of ENZ and the city council or otherwise, but they weighed in on that in a very thoughtful way. Um the um Denver or the downtown development association met yesterday and or maybe it was the day before um and among other many other discussions they the city manager presented a an update on parking management, downtown parking management and the concept of paid parking downtown to that DDA board. uh and there was quite a robust discussion. Uh but one tangible result is that the uh DDA board is going to send representatives to arrange a joint meeting with the transportation commission who is also looking at this. So there's some kind of creative cross-pollinating a foot uh that should should bring some good helpful information about. You may have noticed that the the Chamber Resort Association had a local economic profile update, their annual show that was supposed to be Monday. It's now postponed until May 20th. So, watch out for details on that. Uh the the Garfield Clean Energy Board meets tomorrow, mostly talking about finances, but uh it's coming up. There may be a report back from that. Um councelor Minsky, I was going to highlight the fact that the rafter board has non voting members. But maybe you're going to you're going to do that. Go ahead.

Go ahead. You've got the report. I think Coun Council Zinski is going to give a more thorough report on the raft of board meeting which was earlier this week for transportation authority. I just wanted to note uh that um at that meeting two new non voting members were seated on the board. one representing Garfield County, one representing Rifle, which struck me as a creative step forward in terms of better communication. So, it's kind of a cool deal, but Erin's got the other juicier details. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor Prom Solinski, please.

Just a couple of little things. Um yeah, so the two new non- voting members, it's the uh RAFTA board is exciting because that activates our communities to the west to our greater transportation conversations which I see is a real positive for all of us. Um and the other thing was just to kind of add clarity around um the raised GL grant that the West Glwood Transit Center or that Raft had received for the West Glowwood Transit Center. Um I think that it may have hit the news that that had gotten pulled. The Raptor was able to secure a 5-year extension. So that just puts that um project on pause, but it doesn't kill it, which is I think a good thing for our community also in terms of public transportation. Um and then, you know, on the tourism side of things, um believe it or not, there's some positives. I guess no snow is good for Glennwood Springs, which is news to me. um that visitor spending is up um which is a good thing and that's good for our local economy and it shows that Glennwood still has a great deal of appeal. Um and then also in terms of tourism it's kind of a DDA thing but u we're looking at activating some more of our local events and having our DDA kind of take that on. We've got some new resources and amenities with the north landing. Um, you know, continued use of the area under the plaza. We might see things like Oktoberfest make a, you know, kind of reemergence. So, you know, good things happening on both of those fronts. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Any other announcements? We'll see none. Thank you for that. Uh, moving on to item six, the consent agenda. And I am entertaining a motion. Mayor Prom Solinski, please. I would like to move to approve the consent agenda as it is written. Thank you. We have a motion to approve. Councelor Smith, I'll be glad to second that. Um, and now we're at an appropriate moment. I'll highlight this little letter that relates to one of those items. Okay. We have a motion in a second and we're going to go into discussion. And why don't you start?

Great. One of the items, uh, as you note is, uh, a a request that the city of Lemma Springs provide letter of support for a grant application through Garfield or green energy and economy for the region and their partner called Colorado Car Share um to put a pilot station into Glenwood Springs to try car sharing by the way using an all-electric vehicle. Um, my note is that in our city council original packet, there was a sample letter for that endorsement. I presume to do some editing on that to I think make it a little more specific and relevant to Glenn Springs. And that's the letter that that you have before you. If you if you like this version of the letter, I would like to imply or without objection have that be part of this approval of that item.

And you're referring to uh item C. Great. Yes. Thank you. Any more discussion about the consent agenda? Mayor Pro Tim Solinsky. I just want to extend a a note of appreciation to Kasana Ogali who is going to be reappointed to our um finance advisory board. I'm always so grateful to citizens who are willing to serve on our boards and commissions and help us um do the good work we do.

Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? [clears throat] I got a tiny little add-on and I missed that in agenda changes. The item E on the consent agenda has been removed uh earlier in the week because we missed the deadline for submitting that letter. No. Oh, that's a that's a different letter. That's a new E. Yeah, which is I was going to comment then whatever I just said never. So A through F stands the way it is. I they have a stand.

So if there's no more discussion, I'll call for the question. It passes. It's unanimous. Excellent. Thank you. Item seven, Arbor Day proclamation. And for that, I'm going to ask Eric Schwind to come up front and I'll meet you up there. And then Mitchell is usually in charge.

[clears throat]

Thank you, Ryan. All right, that's the sign. All right, let's see. So, it is that time of year again. We have Arbor Day and we usually uh issue a proclamation and uh Eric here is our urban ecology and forestry supervisor for the city of Glenwood Springs and he works under the departments and rec department park. Official proclamation. Whereas in 1872 the Nebraska Board of Agriculture established a special date to be set aside for the planting of trees. And whereas this holiday called Arbor Day was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska. And whereas Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and the world. And whereas trees can be a solution for combating climate change by reducing the erosion of our precious top soil by wind and water, cutting heating and cooling costs, moderating the temperature, cleaning the air, producing life-giving oxygen, and providing habitat for wildlife. And whereas trees are renewable source are a renewable source resource giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires, and countless other wood products. And whereas trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community. And whereas trees, whenever they're planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal. Now, therefore, I, Marco Dame, mayor of city of Glenwood Springs, do hereby April 24th, 2026 proclaim as Arbor Day in the city of Glenwood Springs. And I urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands. And further, I urge all citizens to plant trees and gladden the

heart and promote the well-being of this for future generations. Dated this 19th day of March, 2026. There you go. I'm going to sign this and then you can have Thank you, Eric. So much for trees are great. Okay, moving on to item eight.

Correct. That was number seven. And we're going at eight. Uh a public update on special use permit and a certificate of occupancy status for 10 for 100200 Midland Avenue occupied by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. And from what I understand, I think Steve Boyd is going to kick this off and then legal has also a small presentation. So please, Steve.

Yep, that's correct. Good evening, uh mayor and council. Steve Boyd, I'm your city manager. Um, I'm not going to be breaking any news tonight, I don't think, but I wanted to give everybody an update so that everybody knows what is happening and where we are right now with this facility. Uh, a temporary certificate of occupancy was issued in 2004 for this facility. Uh, after it passed final inspection. Uh, that means all the life, health, safety issues were u completed, but there may have been a punch list of things that still needed to get done before there was a permanent CO that was issued. that permanent seal was never issued and it looks like it was administrative oversight uh on the part of the city at that time. So no life safety issues but we should have uh issued that CO and we didn't. Also at that time a special use permit was issued by the city which is what allows the detention facility uh portion of the building. Uh results of a recent Freedom of Information Act request that was filled by the federal government appear to show a number of instances where they violated the uh terms of that special use policy or u special use permit and held people there longer than 12 hours which was uh part a key part of that uh agreement. Uh in [clears throat] 2003 the facility was actually approved and that happened through a properly noticed public hearing. Uh there was no comment um at the time. So at this point uh to we would inspect that facility if there's a complaint or if there's a reason that they're going to put in for another building permit. That didn't happen for a while. We did get a complaint recently here. We went out and inspected the facility right away as soon as we could. Um there were a handful of things that they need to clean up um before a new CO can be offered. I think that there are two potentially life safety issues there. One of them is the sprinkler

heads need to be replaced. Um that is just an age thing. The code requires that happens every 20 years and those are at their um life's end. Um and I'm told that's going to be done on the 23rd I think. Um, the other issue potentially is we did not have in our file a copy of their evacuation plan. They had one, we just didn't have it. And we do now. And it is u uh approved by us. So, [clears throat] we don't really get to choose what tenants um go in property owners businesses here, right? And we need to treat everybody the same. So, as long as they clean those things up, the city has to issue another certificate of occupancy. The special use permit is another matter uh because we do have some reason to believe that there have been violations. Um the city is will initiate an enforcement process that's outlined in our municipal code. It's going to include an issuance of a notice of violation to the government services agency administration that is uh who manages leases on behalf of the federal government. um they'll be given an opportunity to respond and unless their response provides evidence that there was no violation. Uh it will go to a hearing in front of planning and zoning commission. Um and the purpose of that uh hearing would be to determine whether or not to revoke their special use permit. That would probably happen in April. Um this is a quasi judicial matter. Um, so council and PNZ members are probably going to be asked not to discuss this by your city attorney, who I'm going to uh ask to come up here when I'm finished. Um, when we first heard of this, we took immediate action to address the issues. Uh, we put out press releases. We I mean, I haven't turned down any requests for interviews. We filled I don't know how many core requests. We've tried to be as transparent as we possibly can. It's taken a little while to pull all the information together. In fact, I jumped the gun. uh a little bit and said

something to somebody that wasn't right and had to go back and apologize. Sorry about that. U but we are trying to be as as transparent as possible. If we miss something um like a permanent CEO, we will own it and we will fix it and that's what we're doing. Um it's been said that we are knowingly letting an illegal operation continue for 20 years, denying public input and evading mandatory safety inspections. It's not quite accurate. Um, we didn't know that the CO the temp the permanent CO uh hadn't been issued. We don't know of any life safety um aspects at all. I I think that um they'll replace the sprinkler heads. We have no reason to think the sprinkler system doesn't work. Uh but that should fix that. So, this is a complicated situation. There's a couple decades of history behind it. Um, it's also true that the environment back then shortly after 911 was very different than the environment that we're in today. So, uh, we're trying to deal with it directly right now. Um, and I think we've got some people that have showed up tonight to speak on behalf of it. But with that, I will turn it over to Carl Hanland.

Thank you, Steve, for all the information and the timeline.

Good evening, council. Excuse me. Carl Hanland, Carne Hanland, your city attorney. Um, what I'm going to do because I think it's important to set expectations about timing in particular and about process for you as well as for the public and the community. Um, because this is an issue that is critically important to all of us. Um, and you are going to be put in a very difficult position as is the planning commission to set aside maybe your personal beliefs and you're going to be asked to look at evidence and render decisions in a quasi judicial format. Um, my job, part of why I'm doing this tonight and walking you through that process and for the benefit of the public is so that everybody understands that my goal here is to have the most defensible decision possible. It doesn't do any good to have a mic drop moment and then immediately lose in court. That doesn't serve any of our interests. Doesn't serve the community's interests. So, with that, I'm going to walk through in a little bit more detail what Steve just described. We will be undertaking an enforcement action pursuant to um the municipal code 070 010 080. And that outlines the process that we need to follow in this case. The reason you heard that it's going to be heard in front of the planning commission is because underneath those provisions of the code uh to consider revocation of a special use permit or any other development permit. It goes back to the board that it was originally approved by. So that's why it will start at the planning commission. That's why tonight is not a decision point. And that's why at the close of this I'm going to ask you, you're going to hear a lot of folks testifying. I don't want them to be mad at you because you're not engaging. It's because I am asking you not to engage so that we can produce the cleanest process possible and the most defensible outcomes we possibly can.

So with that said, uh a couple of weeks ago, um relying on um data from the deportation data project, uh which aggregated an enormous amount of data through large foyer requests to the federal government, ensued several lawsuits to obtain uh and nail down that that data. Um, regarding hold times in various facilities, there is data up to October of 2025. There is more ensuing litigation to try to get more data surrounding that. And so from the standpoint of the city, we're having to operate on the data that multiple lawsuits produced in foyer requests. Um, and that data that is most relevant to us is sort of from about um, March through October of 2025. Based on that, there appears to have been a violation. And so that's what triggered the process underneath the code. Early next week, a notice of violation, I'll probably refer to it as an NOV as I'm talking, will be issued to the property owner and to the GSA outlining what we believe are violations of the terms and conditions of that special use permit. We will also set that hearing at that time because under the code that is one of the paths we have and we feel it's most important to get to a public hearing as quickly as possible. hearing will be scheduled before the planning commission for April 28th, 2026 at 6 PM. Uh the sole question there is whether or not the SGP was violated. And so I want to distinguish that for your purposes and for the public's purpose because there again, I think a lot of us have very strong feelings about this issue. I know I do. Um but I also know that I have to defend the decision that comes out of the planning commission and potentially out of you. So depending on the decision of the

planning commission, they have really three options. They can revoke the SUP, they can find that there's insufficient evidence to revoke that SUP, or they could um issue some kind of an order related to it regarding complant future compliance or reporting or something like that. Once that decision is entered, regardless of what it is, there is a 7-day period to appeal that decision to you as city council. So that's why I'm asking you not to engage. As hard as it's going to be this evening, not to engage because for us to defend that process, you need to be an impartial decision maker when when or if you hear that appeal. They have seven days to file an appeal. We would schedule that hearing before you at the next available council meeting uh for which we could get it properly noticed and on the agenda. So that could be two weeks, that could be three weeks. We need to make sure that we are properly noticed again because any decision that is made, [clears throat] we want to make sure that we can defend it as fully as possible. Um, and we're going to talk about where those challenges might come up after that hearing before you, you would have those same three options. You could uphold the decision of the planning commission, you could overturn the decision of the planning commission, or you could enter some type of an order modifying that SUP based on the evidence that you heard at that hearing. That's critical and I'm saying that for the benefit of the public that you're going to, you know, that's where the testimony gets into the record for you to consider on what your your next steps are after that decision, whatever it is under state statute, under what we call, you'll hear a lot of times we shorthand it to rule 106. Colorado rule of civil procedure 106 provides a ne mechanism whereby your decision is appealed to state district court that appeal would focus on two primary areas of interest.

One would be did you provide procedural due process in other words did you follow your process to the letter in rendering whatever decision you happen to make. I am not presupposing any outcomes of telling you the process. The other would be did you act in an arbitrary and capriccious manner which is a very high standard to overturn your decision but areas of concern are did you have exparte communications? Was that the reason you based your decision on? Was your decision on based on something else outside of the record? Was the decision based on your personal feelings regarding the matter and not the evidence presented at the hearing? Those are the types of things that could potentially get that decision overturned. At that point, whatever the court would rule if if they, you know, if a party took it that far, at that point, we probably could take an enforcement action, whatever that would be in the in the case if you happen to revoke the SUP. It would still be subject to appeal in the state of Colorado um up to the Court of Appeals, that decision of the of the trial court. I should back up too and talk about a little bit about timelines. So, you have 28 days to file that notice. Um, under 106, it is considered an expedited proceeding in Colorado, which means rather than waiting 18 months for a trial date, we probably would see a trial date within 60 to 90 days. The reason I'm laying this out is that there again, I want to be clear that there is no easy moment where like, oh, we're done and we can declare victory. This is this is a grind. um it's designed that way to be a grind for the benefit of everyone, right? So, at that point, um depending on um what the what the property owner and the GSA wanted to do, we might have to go back to court, try to get injunctive relief, get an order of the court, that kind of thing. We

would we would make those battles. What I will tell you is from our research uh and our preparations as a law firm internally as to what to expect in this process, I will tell you that when we look at what happened in Chicago, in the Chicago suburbs, um in Portland, uh in some of the facilities in Minnesota, we would anticipate either at the point of which we issue a notice of violation that or the first time potentially that a negative decision decision was was rendered. So the planning commission uh voted to revoke the SUP. Um that rather than uh engage in state court, uh this administration has um almost immediately filed suit against the local jurisdiction in federal court and so that battle would move into federal court. Um therein we are preparing for that eventuality regardless of what the decision is because we want to be prepared to move quickly and effectively in that instance. It is much harder when I'm talking about the federal courts to give you a timeline. Um they are, you know, but the joke in law school was that a federal court judge sits at the uh or God sits at the right hand of the of a federal court judge. Um they have a lot of control over the speed of their docket. And so I would like to be able to tell you what I think that timeline would be, but I just don't know. Um, one of the battles will probably be whether or not it should be remanded back to state court because it is a matter purely of state concern, not of federal concern over local land use jurisdiction. Um, there's a an extension doctrine, surprisingly enough, called the Colorado River Extension Doctrine that might apply in this case. Uh, that would put us back in state court, which is certainly where we'd prefer to be. So, we know in all of those cases that there will be challenges. And I think the most challenging thing is actually what you

have to do tonight, which is you're going to hear from a lot of members of your community. And I'm going to ask you not to directly engage because I don't like to lose. And this is one of those instances where we have to get it all right. Um, and depending on the outcome, and there again, I'm not presupposing an outcome, I'm going up against a much larger law firm than I have. So, with that, I am happy to answer any questions, but there again, I wanted to set the stage for what you can expect, uh, what the community can expect and also the timeline of what we can expect as we move through this process. So, with that, happy to answer questions.

Thank you, Carl, for this information. Very helpful. Mayor Prom Sinsky, please. Thank you. So, while we're moving through this process and potentially while this is kind of hung up in the court system, does the um the entity continue to operate as they have been or are there any restrictions that would

Yeah, that's that's a really good question, Councelor Zillinsky. Um, a little bit of it depends on the posture we get into. Um certainly we would ask for injunctive relief almost immediately. I don't know the standards are slightly different in federal and state court. I would feel probably more comfortable in state court getting that injunction than I would in federal court honestly. Um but that certainly would be something at the point at which it became appropriate in the process to request that relief. Um, we would probably argue for it if it went up through the state court system at the point at which um either an appeal was filed under rule 106 in that 28 day window or at the point where that 28 day window um ran out if no appeal had been filed. We would ask for that relief at that time for enforcement purposes. um in federal court, it would probably be one of the first battles that we fought um which is whether or not it could continue to operate. That is assuming we got through a planning commission hearing and they voted to revoke there. Again, I want to be very clear that I'm not giving you process and we're talking about worst cases,

but you know, I'm not pre presupposing an outcome. Um that would be probably one of the first battles that would be fought over whether or not injunctive relief um to be able to close it during the pendency of that action or not. Um and we'll just have to see as as I think everybody has seen in the news. Um sometimes you get them, sometimes you don't. Really depends on the circuit and I can't tell you. It would depend probably a little bit on the draw the judge we got here in um in the state of Colorado, frankly.

And then I just had one other question. um you know a lot of things have changed over the course of the 20ome years. Will PNZ as a matter of process be evaluating this with the codes to from today or the codes from the time it would Yeah. So another good question. Um the evaluation will be the terms and conditions of the original approval and the critical one in this instance is hold time. Um and so in the original approval

um there was representations um made um and it was the basis of the decision that that 12-h hour hold limit that's going to be the primary lever and that is the primary um not only the primary but one of the only um elements that the planning commission would be looking at underneath our code as is in any code those pre-existing Even if you know we changed the code in a major way in like 2017 2018 and this would not be a permitted use even underneath the special use permit under today's code our code acknowledges if you if you take this particular use out of the equation that if you had received a development permit prior to that code change that you don't lose that development permit unless you violate the terms of it or you abandon. And so that's why we'll be that's why this work from the um the deportation project um is so incredibly important because quite frankly we don't have the resources to be able to extricate that information um on our own.

Thank you. Thank you councelor. Have we received a formal complaint that has begun the legal process here or is this just based on the data that we've seen from project deportation or wherever that came from the portable cross? Um anytime that um we have received innumerable complaints um but beyond that um it's incumbent on us once we discover that information to act on it which is really what I was doing. Um the that concern is is one that's a a material term to that permit and so I dug into the data and try to sort through it.

So we're obligated to treat it as though it's a formal complaint. Yeah. And and I'm trying to understand I I always get tripped up on this quasi judicial as you know. But if that's the if that's the case then Carl, hasn't this process already begun? and we probably shouldn't even take public comment.

Well, um that is a decision for you guys that respectfully say you probably shouldn't make but um one of the reasons I wanted to do this publicly is that I could have sent you a memo and said here's the process and here's what's going to happen and don't ever put it on an agenda. One of the ways to protect against that is that what you're going to hear today is while not part of that record is something that is publicly available and everybody will be able to see. Um, and that's why I don't I don't want to limit these guys ability to speak and I'm trying to find a way to navigate that um to protect it that that process as much as I possibly can. Um, so that's that's why I did the whole spiel that I just did. I you know there is some risk there but I think it is a risk worth taking councelor thank you Carl we're looking at a potentially yearslong process here

yes

beyond tonight after tonight should anyone up here at the be approached at the grocery store at the community center at the car wash at the soccer pitch and and the expectation is that we engage, we provide an update, we respond, we we either support or any sort of other reaction, right? What do you advise that we do? I would advise what I do anytime you're engaging in a in a land use hearing um which is to to be polite and to say you know um Steve your opinion is incredibly important to the city and I want to make sure that it's included in the record and I want to make sure that I can sit to make that decision and so I would ask you to provide either written or public comment at the planning commission meeting and if it comes before council to provide that then as well.

Thank you. Yes. Very important. Thank you, Councelor Tanley.

Shut me down if this is an inappropriate question. Do we have data? I've seen the data, you know, the plot data that says, okay, here's 12 hours. Here's what happened after that 12 hours. Do we [clears throat] have data that would give us any idea of what would happen if this facility was closed down and people that were at this facility were taken to another facility as to whether or not we're putting them in a worse position or a better position? No, I mean I don't I don't have I don't have that data and and potentially maybe that's something that um in response and at a hearing either GSA or the property owner would provide to us but we don't have any way to assess that.

There's nothing we can do to request that. So we have some idea. I mean we can we can request that. I don't know that it's actually germanine to the decision of whether or not the holds exceeded the special use permit timeline. Um, I mean, it may go to whether or not you wanted to modify the special use permit. And so, certainly we could ask for that information. Um, I I can see where it could fit into that to that equation. So, we could certainly ask for that information. Thanks. One one other quick question. Um, between now and March 23rd, if that's when the sprinklers are being redone and whatnot, is the facility still being used?

I And I think you're going to hear a lot of testimony on this. It's very hard to get information on on timing and the use of that facility. Um I don't think we I if our fire marshall believed that they weren't functional, he absolutely would have red tagged that building. Okay.

And keeping in mind that that that condition is throughout 100 Midland. That is an integrated fire suppression system. So it's in every in every um uh business out there. Um this is really just a timeout on the age of the sprinklers. Um and so like I said I and I I should also mention that the reason why from our perspective we we think the appropriate place to look is the SGP is um a red tag is temporary, right? You can correct the condition. um uh even if that were the case. Um and and what I think the community wants to look at and I think what we want to look at is is this operating in the way that that was represented to us uh 23 years ago.

Thanks. Thank you, Councelor Smith. Thank you. And thank you both for very clear and and extensively researched background on this. I have a couple of questions on procedure that I think are safe to ask without compromising anything and then maybe a more qualitative question. Um if indeed sorry looks like this is headed to a planning and zoning hearing. It is. Will that include opportunity for general public comment?

Absolutely. That's that's why This is the date and the time. Make sure everybody has the date and time.

And if the decision of that body is appealed, so goes to the next potential opportunity for relief, which is this city council. Does that deliberation by city council have to rely only on the record from the planning and zoning meeting or is that another opportunity for general public comment? Oh, there would absolutely be public comment. Um, there always is. Um, you would be looking in part I I mean primarily you'd be looking at the record in terms of the materials that were provided uh and the prior testimony, but certainly feel you would taking additional public testimony as well. Thank you. at the planning and zoning decision point or after the planning and zoning reaches a conclusion after that hearing. Um depending on which way they decide who has opportunity to appeal.

That's actually a a very good and insightful question. Um we don't define in the code specifically what an interested party is but that's the language that we use. We have relied on um sort of the case law that is around the rule 106 actions as to what an interested party is. It's it's not perfectly clear. I will be honest. Welcome to the law and why my job sometimes is you always hear me say well maybe Um, primarily it would be someone who has um, uh, an interest, most often a property interest that is affected by the decision um, that could that could appeal that. Um, on rare occasions we have appealed as staff on decisions of the planning commission to the council. Uh, and so I wouldn't rule that out as well. if this isn't getting too far out on the thin ice on an 80 degree day. Um, is it possible for someone other than city staff if if the decision goes a way that someone in the public doesn't like it, is there anybody out there who could appeal? I you know and I I think I what my answer to that would be is that I I don't want to create a series of whatifs or a possibility. Um I think we would take a look at each one of those individually and if we believed it it fit within that um uh the legal framework of an interest arrested party. I mean I'm a firm believer that you try to make that as broad as possible. um personally um and since I'd be one of the ones having to think about it, I guess that's what I would say is that I I believe in public processes. Thank you. That that's helpful. And and I

deliberately was kind of round about asking that question for that reason. I don't want to try to pretend scenarios and thus compromise or predict anything. uh and that in turn is couched in in my uh full embrace of your reminder that every single step of this process needs to be done meticulously. Yes.

In order to be fair to everybody and in order to get a proper decision ultimately. So I I want to be overcautious about how we ask questions even um and and including my final question which is really just a repreeze of councelor Schmal's question. Shouldn't we air on the side of that caution about not contaminating the process by not having a public hearing tonight? you're you're not having a public hearing. Um and what I would say is that um every single one of the people in this room could have stood up at citizens appearing before council and offered the same testimony in front of you. The fact that it is simply on the agenda in a place in a different place on the agenda does not change the fact that as the elected representatives of the city of Bloodwood Springs, any citizen has their three minutes to come up here and talk to you.

Thank you. Sorry, I said that was last question. There is a correlary question. We continue to receive letters, right, email messages and such relayed through the city clerk or sent to us directly sometimes. Should we be not reading those? Um, I think it's I think it's fine if you read them. They're going to go in. All of that is going to be amassed in the public record that that Ryan and Trent and his team will be putting together because there again, I am going to try to build the most comprehensive record of this I possibly can because I know I'm whatever the outcome, I'm going to have to defend it and I want to make sure that we get it right. Read but don't respond.

Read but don't respond. Um that that is absolutely thank you uh councelor Wymer. Um and there again I you know for the public's benefit maybe the press's benefit if they're here or they're online. Don't take that as disinterest in what you have to say. Take that as it's part of the process. Um and frankly from my standpoint I would love to see you you know come into one of those hearings and and provide your views. Thank you very much. That was that was detail about detail. Appreciate the patient responses.

Thank you, councelor. Oops. Councelor Schmall, please. I'm not going to belabor it. I I yeah, I I I understand your your where you're at and from from both sides, the caution from both sides because should should uh should we listen to a whole lot of things that are not really coming into evidence in writing? Uh the argument can be made that we've been unduly influenced and the caution needs to go both ways. I think

with without question and that's why I said this is not without risk. Um but in my estimation because your citizens always have the opportunity to send you an email. Uh they always have an opportunity to stand up at public comment. Um we're simply putting it all together in one place. Um it's also why the NOV is going to be issued next week and wasn't issued today in terms of just timing. Okay. Thank you, Mayor Prompilency, please. So, what I have is more of a statement than a question. Is that acceptable? See if

All right. So, um I don't know if I was the only one, but I was one of the people that asked that we have a bit of a a public statement made on this topic in the interest of transparency and also to reassure um all the concerned people that that nobody's asleep on this topic that you know, but there's a process that must be followed. I don't want the fact that I asked for this to be on the regular agenda to suppress the voice of the people, which is why I'm not uncomfortable with hearing public comment at this time. Um, I don't I I have a very high level of responsibility to be responsive to the concerns brought before us. And so I see this as part of that process. And so that's why I'm like I know that I can stick to the rules and still listen to what people have to say. Thank you.

Thank you. Very good. Any other questions to the staff at this point?

Okay, we'll see none. Thank you, Carl. Thank you, Steve, again, uh for your information and and and laying it out how how it happened and what needs to happen or will happen. Um I'm going to open the public uh comment portion here shortly, but I just want to make it understood that we will not engage in the discussion. We will we will absolutely hear you. Um you are going to be part of the record. It's all recorded. Um, so say what you have to. Um, you have three minutes. I will cut you off. I don't like doing it, but I will. There's a lot of you here. Um, you have three minutes. And, uh, when we're done, we'll just say thank you and we'll say goodbye. We're not going to engage. Just just so you guys know, um, this is this is too high stakes to to not do it right. So, with that, I I will open the public portion and we'll start with Ashley Stall. And as always, please state your name and whether you live in city limits or not.

Good evening. My name is Ashley Stall and I'm a homeowner here in Glennwood Springs. Steve, last week you sent me an email apologizing for summarily dismissing my concerns about the ICE detention facility. For weeks, I've brought city staff and this council documentation, building code violations, expired certificates, federal detention data. You've had everything you've needed to act. And until now, you've dismissed it. You've dismissed your own citizens until the Colorado Times reporter published it. Until 32 state lawmakers demanded answers. Only then did you apologize. Only then did you act. This is not an oversight. This is a cover up that collapsed under scrutiny. You confirmed that ICE violated 12-hour detention limits in its special use permit. That triggers mandatory revocation proceedings as we just heard. On February 26th, one day after your inspection documented broken emergency lighting and untested sprinklers, a man suffered a medical emergency that required hospitalization outside out of that facility. You knew the space was unsafe and you continue to allow detention to occur anyways. Even though you could red tag the fac the facility as we heard yesterday's Aspen Daily News quoted you, Carl, saying that any reasonable person would have required inspections in 2003. And I've gotten to know you a little bit. said, "I believe you're a good person who cares about this community, but you were a city attorney in 2003. You were present at the planning and zoting meeting that approved this permit. Any reasonable person would have required inspections. Why didn't you? You had the authority then, and you have the authority now." Good people can make bad decisions, and that was a bad decision that had 21 years of consequences. Corora records also revealed that last year HSI sent a spear intelligence bulletin to our police department treating residents asking basic questions about this building as suspicious activity worthy of surveillance. You weren't just ignoring this facility. You've been actively helping ICE monitor your own citizens. Why don't you take your own citizens seriously? When ICE wants something, you bend over backwards to give it to them.

But when we demand accountability, you dismiss us until the media forces your hand. So, what I'm going to ask you to do tonight is to red tag this and condemn suites 110 and 210. You have the authority to do it. Who cares if it's a short-term solution? We can do both. We can redtag this facility and stop detentions immediately. Um, also, we don't have to wait until April to schedule till late April. We can schedule this sooner. We should be getting this taken care of as fast as possible. There are people being held in there in unsafe conditions. Your admission last week creates legal liability. You cla can't claim you didn't know anymore. You have the authority. The city has had it for 21 years and the only question is whether you'll use it. If you don't act tonight, every family torn apart in this moment is a choice you made. Every person detained in that unsafe facility is your responsibility. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. May Gray, please state your name and whether you live in the city limits or not. My name is May Gray and I currently live in Carbondale, Colorado.

So I wanted to come up here and tell you that this is something the fact is is that we are getting national attention and all of the little ice facilities that are now scattered through Colorado have attention and that all started here because of this ice facility. So that makes you all the leaders in marking what are you going to do? How are you going to set a precedent? Because you will be the leaders amongst the rest of Colorado and they will look to what you do. And I would like to mark that that I know that we have incredible leadership here in Glenwood Springs and we are looking for that leadership to be stable on. You have citizens who are showing up here to be a part of your leadership and we're coming and speaking to you in good faith. And I'm asking that you please take our good faith and actually lead us forward in a positive direction. This is about compassion. We all know yes that in 2003 this is not about a mic drop. We don't want you to do a mic drop. But yes, the conditions in 2003 were way different. We are underneath a different administration with different rules, different laws, different things that they are now trying to accomplish. This is no longer about 911. This is about kidnapping our our neighbors, our friends, our family, and putting them in a space that isn't even supposed where they're supposed to remain. This is about telling your people that you you care for them. Immigrants are not. They are humans. They are people who will just need your compassion. And you it is on your shoulders to show that. Good leaders have compassion and understand what their neighbor needs. We appreciate your time. Thank you for letting us speak. We are very thankful and you guys keep doing the great job that you're doing. I hope you have a wonderful night.

Thank you. Sally Botton, please state your name and whether you live in city limits or not.

Hi, I'm Sally Boutton. I live outside of city limits. Um but I consider Glendwood to be part of my community. Um, just quickly before I read my prepared statement in response to two points brought up by the city manager, um, I3 detention requires annual inspections of life safety infrastructure. There's no evidence that those inspections have been completed over 20 years. It also appears that the city is expecting the facility to meet group B code for general office use, not group I3 code for detention use, which is more stringent and takes precedent. I urge the council to investigate these points further. Immigration enforcement here doesn't look like it does in Chicago or Minneapolis. Here it is quiet. It is efficient and evidence indicates that it is aided by county and city law enforcement. At the last meeting, we were told to take all concerns about Spear over to the county. But given the Glenwood police chief signed the Spearou in July of 2025 and the city hasn't shown evidence of a formal withdrawal from Spear since, it does appear that Glenwood Springs is currently a member of Spear. And that's a problem. As part of their activities, Spear consolidates and shares data from interactions with the public, traffic stops, 911 calls, etc. with every other member. That includes HSI, a department of ICE. giving HSI the keys to our local residents information exposes that information to all of ICE, including enforcement and removal operations. This data sharing appears to violate Colorado law. And it is law for good reason. I don't want to live in a community where someone witnessing a crime is scared to report it because they know it might mean the end of everything they've worked for over the last 20 years. I don't want to live in a community where kids learn it's not safe to call the police for help because when they saw their mother do just that, she was taken from them. This is not hypothetical. These things are happening in our community. That mom who called 911 for

help was treated like a violent criminal even though she's not. She was taken by ICE to the Midland Detention Center. She was chained at her feet, waist, and hands and locked in a large cell with cement benches and a toilet in the corner separated by a partial divider. She describes the room as freezing, much colder than the rest of the building. When she told an agent she was cold, he threw her some dirty, foul smelling blankets. After hours alone in the cell, the agent returned, replaced her full restraints, loaded her into a transport van and van, and took her to Geo. She is now in her home country, separated from her children, all because she trusted local police department to do their job. This family was torn apart because of her local PD's membership in Spear. This is just one story. How many more have yet to be uncovered? As a mother, I cannot imagine anything more painful than being separated from my child. The city and its rush to correct what you call an administrative oversight, but what I call 20 years of negligence is actively facilitating the separation of parents from their children. ICE under this administration has shown a blatant disregard for the Constitution, for due process, for human dignity, for human life.

And we're at three minutes. Thank you very much, Emma Ross. Emma Ross mayor sooner. If I could switch order with her, I believe that Miss Lopez is next. That'd be fine. Actually, there's two more down, but that's okay. Please come forward. State your name and whether you live in city limits or not. My name Can you hear me? My name is Justennia Lopez and I live within city limits here in Glenwood Springs. Thank you.

Um, the community wants ICE out. The community wants to dissolve spear and the community wants to stop AI surveillance. The community wants our local leaders to make the right decision and fight for their people. I'm here today to share my dissatisfaction and concern with you about the permit regarding the ICE center located at 100 Midland Avenue and the compliance and aid our local law enforcement has offered to ICE processes. Instead of reinstating the per building's permit, it would be in your best interest to use your position of power to safeguard our city and say no, we do not want to work with ICE and deny their permit. If a permit is issued for 100 Midland Avenue, the city of Glenwood Springs could be held liable for violating state law. Colorado law HB231100 prohibits state and local governments from entering into or renewing contracts with federal agencies to house people for civil immigration purposes. If few city council members reinstate 100 Midland Avenue, serious legal consequences may follow. A simple solution would be to again not reinstate the permit and issue resolutions to the city of Glenwood Springs stating what and what not you will be doing to ensure the safety and priority of your local members. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Now we go back to Emma Ross. Please state your name and whether you live in city limits or not.

Hi, my name is Emma Ross. I am a basalt resident and the actions that happen here affect all of us in the valley. I am grateful to have an opportunity to address you tonight. The issue that I want to raise is separate from but related to the special use permit at 100 Midland Avenue and that is what Miss Bowen touched on which is the spear initiative. Now, the Spear Initiative is an information sharing agreement between local law enforcement, including the Glenwood Springs Police Department and the Garfield County Sheriff with federal civil immigration enforcement, including ICE. And in fact, the police chief of Glenwood Springs signed that memorandum of understanding as a member of the Spear Response Group on July 25th of 2025. To the best of my knowledge, the Glenwood Springs City Council did not approve that agreement before it was signed. And there are two problems with that. The first is a procedural problem. Glennwood Springs and any entity under the city cannot enter into an intergovernmental agency agreement without approval of the legislative body under Colorado substantive law and under the Colorado Constitution. That legislative body is Glenwood Springs Town Council. But there's also a substantive problem which is that even if that agreement had been approved by Glenwood Springs Town City Council, that would violate substantive Colorado law that says any local entity shall not share non-public information to aid civil immigration enforcement. And the story that Miss Botton show

shared is exactly why members of our community should be able to call 911 when someone's in labor, when someone is hurt, when their child is missing without fear of immigration enforcement as a result of that. Now, every violation of that statute carries a fine of up to $50,000 per violation. And so the issue that I want to raise is a fiscal one. Every time our first responders actually respond to an emergency or make a traffic stop and share information with ICE, that conduct could be fined up to $50,000 per violation. And this is not theoretical. Several weeks ago, the Garfield sheriff was served with a cease and desist letter by someone who is running for attorney general in the state of Colorado. And the attorney general is the body is the person who has the ability to levy that $50,000 fine per violation. So, if one assumes just one traffic stop,

thank you so much for your for your comments. Thanks for thanks for being in Glennwood tonight. Absolutely. Thank you. Amy Houseman, please please state your name and whether you live in city limits.

My name is Amy Houseman and I do live in the city limits. Um, and I used to work for the city of Glenwood Springs. Um, until two months ago, I actually lived in West Glenwood and I lived there for about 10 years before just moving into downtown. Um, I was really surprised about two years ago to learn that there was an ice facility basically right in my backyard when I lived in West Glenwood. Um, well, I still lived in West Glenwood. With our population that's about onethird Latino, I do not believe that allowing this facility to continue to operate here is in our community's best interest. It helps to instill fear in a significant portion of our workers, neighbors, friends, and fellow residents. I personally know people in our community who are terrified that they or their loved one could be picked up and held in that facility with no notice given to their family simply disappeared. Even if they're released a short time later, the fear is still very real. In addition to it operating without a valid certificate of occupancy for many years, obviously times have changed and according to recent reporting, many more people have been held there recently, particularly this past year, I guess. Um, if they have held people there longer than for allowed, then I believe and that well, it's a clear validation. If they have done that and it's been reported that they have, then their license to operate should not be renewed. their license. Um the recent refusal also to allow a state representative access to the facility. I don't know if there was just nobody there to answer the door or respond to him calling and knocking and ringing on the ringing the bell, but um the fact that he was not allowed access even strengthens my resolve in that their license should not be renewed if there's a way to not do it. I understand that this could be a really long and

challenging process as Carl um explained and I hope that that's not a reason for the city council and for our town to take the easy way out and simply not renew the or simply renew their CO to not have to go through a long court battle. Um that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you very much. Hannah Saga Saga

Saga. Thank you. Please state your name and where you live in city limits. Hi, my name is Hannah Sago and I live in Glenwood Springs in city limits. Um, and I'm here to urge you to say no to any form of collaboration with federal immigration authorities, not only for the well-being of our community members, but also in compliance with state law. I appreciate that council and staff are already taking community concerns into account on this issue and the various ways it's manifesting in our community. I have three asks for council in the city. Revoke the special use permit for the ICE detention facility at 100 Midland and immediately shut it down. formally withdraw the Gonet Springs Police Department from Spear and pass a binding resolution that commits to following state law and prohibits any information sharing or other collaboration with federal immigration authorities. On 100 Midland, I was horrified, like many others here, to learn that there's a detention facility in my community that's operated without a valid permit for 20 years and in violation of its original special use permit. I appreciate the city's efforts to swiftly investigate the facility and commit to enforcement. And given that they have violated their special use permit by holding people there for longer than 12 hours in unsafe conditions and cruel conditions as others have mentioned, I urge the city to revoke their permit and immediately shut it down even if the revocation is challenged in court. The city should also consider the legal risks under state law of issu of reissuing this permit. As Yenia mentioned, failing to revoke the permit risks putting the city in violation of this law um by contracting with an immigration detention facility. Beyond the legal and permitting concerns, this facility simply goes against our community's values. It's being used to detain members of our community, not violent criminals, and it doesn't belong in Glenwood Springs. On Sphere, I want to know, as others have mentioned, why the Glenwood Springs Police Department signed an MOU to join a task force with federal immigration authorities without authorization from council. You know, it's incumbent on us once we have information to act on it. First responders like the Glen Spring police already already have a hard job to do and it's this agreement may have been entered into without an understanding of what it was. But now that you're aware

of it, it's incumbent upon you to act and I urge you to immediately withdraw from Spear, prohibit any collaboration or information sharing between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. And this extends to potential data sharing from the flot cameras that may flow from local law enforcement to immigration authorities through this task force. As others have mentioned, this creates a clear safety risk for members of our community. By allowing this collaboration, you're creating an environment where undocumented people are afraid to call on law enforcement even when they are in danger. It's a moral issue. Both of these are moral issues, but it's also a liability issue for the city. If the city and local law enforcement continue to collaborate and enable ICE, there could be significant legal consequences under state law. I urge the city to take strong and immediate steps to end all collaboration with any federal immigration authorities. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Thanks for being here tonight. Aaron Anderson.

Hi. Uh, my name is Aaron Anderson. I use they them pronouns and I live in Glenwood. Um, I came and spoke last week and I I want to stress right now what a privilege it is to be able to come and be at city council to feel safe enough to stand up and speak and share stories and have the ability to leave your house and bring child care and like physically get yourself here. We can't make comments online. To physically come here is a privilege. um the repression that the people who have brought this we are hearing thank yous from the people around for from the citizens for bringing this to um everyone's attention and simultaneously we are learning of different conversations happening between homeland security investigators and our city government about activist groups and today the Garfield County Sheriff showed up at my home my children uh were home after school we were getting ready to come here and serve my partner with a cease and desist I want to read part of this to you to stress the importance of why the my local government needs to be transparent and take ownership and like what the city needs to be doing here. Uh this building houses lawfully licensed businesses that work in the general public and who depend upon the association to keep and maintain the building. This building is not in in violation of any order of the city or other government agency. The building has been inspected every year for fire safety and has obtained a report as recently as October of 2025 that the building passed the fire inspection. The sprinkler heads are being tested as required and we have no reason to believe that they will not pass such test. That's directly contradicts what we're hearing. Um this is a cease and desist that threatens trespass criminal thing. Uh and the things that are alleged in here are not us. Um, that is the thing is a it is a privilege for me and my partner

and my community to stand up and put our name on work. Um, I I I love that somebody had the balls to go and talk to people over there. It wasn't us. Um, and yet the repression is coming from the our sheriff. Uh, it looks like this like Steve Boyd is CCD on this cease and desist. Um, and the repression that that is putting on the impacted community and everybody who is trying to stand up and support and call accountability to this is unacceptable. This is outrageous. Um, my children are afraid to answer the door. Um, and I can't I don't know if you've ever had the cops come and knock on your door. It does not feel good. And my address my address is on this paper that ICE was given. like what does that mean for impacted families to have the risk of having a cease and desist with your name and address incorrectly identifying you given to ICE and the homeowners association in the city. Um the responsibility that you all have to like do this right is huge and the amount of risk and harm it is bringing to the people who are impacted by this issue huge.

Thank you very much. Appreciate you all. Christine Loris, that's what that says. Thank you. How we doing with that? How you interpret her, but I don't think we have anybody here. That's okay because I also speak English, but I just wanted to point out that that's an issue as well. Um that could you please state your name quick and whether I've been or not? Yes, my name is Vina Flores. I live within Glenwood city limits.

Thank you. And as I just pointed out, I think it is unfortunate that there is not always um access for our bilingual or Spanish speaking community, especially on an issue that so deeply predominantly affects us um because we look a certain way, because we can't take our skin off, because we don't always want to take our tongue off and speak in in the dominant language. Um I had a lot to say to you and after just listening to to the process I think I want to refrain from sharing a lot of that and we'll just stress that um I've known about 100 Midland a for a couple of years now. I used to be an immigration parallegal. Um, I knowingly encouraged people to attend their check-in appointments. Um, not aware that they could potentially be detained for more than 12 hours. Really not aware that they could be detained at all. Um, in fact, I encouraged somebody who entered as an undocumented and unaccompanied minor to attend an appointment. I am a part of our Latino community. I am a part of our immigrant community. I am continuously remiss to see that there are signs that our institutions do not always support us the same way that they support purportedly all citizens. listening to the care that our attorney, our city attorney took to explain the process and the due process and how careful we need to be about evidence and what we hear and what we don't hear. Just makes me want to scream when I think about the lack of due process that immigrants are given. When I think about the fact that

we are considered citizens and they are considered aliens and once they end up being in one detainment one temporary detainment center and sent to another detainment center, they don't really have a name anymore. They have an alien number. I don't know that all of this makes sense. It's still very emotional and probably more emotional than what I wish to say. But what I just wish to say is that I hope that you approach this for all of your citizens as you make the decision about the violations of the special use uh permit. Thank you very much. Uh is it Eli or Eli? There you go. Alpern, please state your name and where the 11 city limits.

Hi, I'm Eli Alpern. Um I live in the valley but not city limits.

Thank you. Oh [sighs and gasps] yeah. Thank you all for being here and listening to us. Um I just want to take a moment to like zoom out of this room and think about this as a moment in history and and a moment in time. And there's so much going on right now. Um, and yeah, everything that's happened with ICE this last year and in Minnesota and I'm sure we've all seen horrible videos and if you haven't, you you're not paying attention, but I I assume we all have. And oh yeah, it's it's so heavy for me. um just paying attention with a little empathy, but I can't imagine how scary and heavy it is for um the Latino community here in our valley, which is so essential and important to our community. Um yeah, ICE is not keeping anybody safe. I I believe wherever they go, violence happens. Um they wear masks, they're in unmarked vehicles. Um they're violent. I don't think they go through very much training. Um they're armed and um emboldened and um with all this going on, I feel powerless so much. Um this was a moment of potential for me to come exercise a little bit of power to encourage you all to exercise what is seems to be actual power to me. Um, we're still within a system and I can't believe we're talking about this place and we're talking about life and death issues in this facility and we're

talking about sprinkler heads which are important um for safety. But talking about sprinkler heads in the context of what else is happening in these rooms and what's happening to innocent people taken off the streets um taken from their families and people losing their lives um yeah white people allies what happened in Minnesota um but the countless uncounted um people that don't look like me I that fear is already in this valley, but I don't want it to get worse. And I don't want I I don't want ICE to have a foothold in this valley, in this community um and have a piece of infrastructure. And through whatever power you all have, I encourage you to please keep ICE out um for the entire valley. And I it seems that your power is limited to certain processes, but please

and there's your three minutes. Thank you very much for your comments. This actually concludes our uh names on a signup sheet for tonight. Is there anybody else here that would like to come forward? Please state your name and whether you live in city limits.

Hi, I'm Tracy Zavvel. I live in Carbondale. I might go over so just cut me off. Um nice to see you on this warm March day. Uh it's frustrating knowing that record-breaking high temperatures are coming our way this weekend. I am so tired of living in historic times. I know that the cruelness we are seeing now is really really not anything new. But I think our ability to connect the dots of what's happening and witness it is historic and hopefully our response can also be historic in our resistance too. I'm going to read to you from the Declaration of Independence. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. that when any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness. And I understand that this was written by men who came to settle this country by stealing the land and murdering people and likely using slaves. Slavery was legal at the time. Just because something is legal doesn't make it just. I saw today that the president is requesting an additional $200 billion dollars for the war in Iran. He's also requested an additional $150 billion for ICE. These numbers are astronomical and hard to understand. And how do they affect us? because the the US military is one of the largest institutional emitters of carbon which affects climate change which we're seeing with these historic record-breaking temperatures with sunlight having to close on Sunday with us being in fear of how we're going to get out of the valley if wildfires

are and raging this summer. [snorts] So what does this have to do with ice mass surveillance with AI and spear? It's comes down to complying in advance. We should not comply in advance with authoritarianism or fascism. So [snorts] I ask that you be brave. I have hope in you and faith in you that we do not comply in advance. We know in our bones that what we are witnessing is wrong. If you do not, I invite you to confront the supremacy that allows you to hold to justify these things. And so my ask is to do what you can to get ICE out of our community. Do not renew the lease. Do not approve AIdriven mass surveillance cameras like Flock and shut down or withdraw from the Spear Task Force. Thank you. [snorts]

Thank you very much. Thanks for your comments. Anybody else here tonight, please come forward. Please also state your name and whether you live in city limits or not. You'll get you'll get there.

Elanor Joerger. I live outside of Glenwood city limits. Thank you. I'm in Glenwood. I don't have anything prepared. I have to say I've lived in a many many jurisdictions in my long life and worked for courts and jails and military and this [clears throat] whole aside from the ICE issue which is a hot topic. I would say if a jurisdiction did not give someone a CO, they would not go back to the initial date of of application or or supposed issuance. They would make people comply with the current standards in most cases. I don't know the statutes here. I don't know that. On top of that, if there's any If there's any reason to believe that the special use permit has been violated, that cease and desist order would go out in a hot minute. I fear that part of the this not happening is because of the fear of the strength of the federal government's judicial system. And that concerns me. And I I get the fear. I get that we don't have the the funds here to fight the big dogs, but you know, I I I think that I think you're missing an opportunity to not lower the hammer on this facility, especially with the heat of uh citizens feelings about ICE. When I worked in jails, um, law enforcement agencies did work with

ICE, but only with a judicial order. None of this Nazi nonsense that's going on now. You have to have a judicial order to hold someone in a jail to be transferred to a federal facility. That's all gone by the wayside. But that's that's the bigger picture. the the the focus picture is why isn't the hammer going down on these guys for violating a special use permit and why are we not going back and saying you have to comply with current standards. I know if it was my residence they'd make me comply with current standards no matter whose fault it was that the co didn't get issued. So that's all not prepared. My two cents. Thank you.

Thank you for your two cents. Anybody else? Okay. Please come forward. Sure. State your name and whether you live in city limits, please for me.

Hello. Um thank you all for allowing us to speak this evening. Uh my name is Julie Bombers and I do not live within uh Glenwood city limits. Uh like many in our community, in this room. I uh I recently learned of uh 100 Milan Avenue. I recently learned of the Spear Task Force, recently learned of the flock cameras uh throughout our valley. Um like many others, I'm shocked, horrified, very angry about um the existence of the detention facility, the violations of personal privacy that are happening um every day while we're on the road. um on on any corner you look on now. Uh who knows whether there's a camera watching you? Um and who knows who's looking at that data. Who knows what kinds of cameras there are. Um this is all deeply deeply disturbing. I had uh prepared comments and I've been rewriting them as I've been listening uh throughout the evening. Um so forgive me if it's a little disjointed here. Um but um the recent reports and recent information uh has made it clear that violations are happening, violations of federal policy, violations of municipal policy. Um with maximum hold times being violated um and documented instances of this happening, uh I urge city council to uh to enforce its policies um to do its due diligence in in the upcoming um procedures. Uh um [clears throat]

I urge city council um based upon these documented special use permit violations to revoke the special use permit um to re and to close the detention facility uh operating at 100 Midland Avenue. I urge city council to formally withdraw from the sphere task force um to revoke the unauthorized signatures um to audit the data and to dissolve their participation to dissolve the task force. Um, as a city council, I urge you to represent your constituents both in this room, throughout the community, those who feel um, privileged and safe enough to come and speak this evening in instances like this and and those who do not feel safe and privileged enough to come and speak in front of you. Um, I urge you to represent your constituents and to make legislative decisions for the good of the community, which is your stated job. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you. Thank you for being here. All right, last call. Anybody else? Okay, you'll see none. Anybody online? This is a a formal listening session. So, I'll I'll invite online people to this one, but I see no hand going up. So, we'll close the public portion of uh item eight tonight. And uh like I said last time, just want to say thank you for all of you being here and and I for one, I can't speak for the rest, but I hear you. I hear you loud and clear. and and and and I feel like I should be careful what I say because of where I'm sitting, but I I I agree with most of what I heard. So, um if I wasn't sitting here, I'd be on your side, but I'm sitting here, so I can't. So, anyway, so thank you for being here. Um we're not going to respond to any of it. There will be a process that um we're going to engage here in and uh um just follow the follow the process. This is this is due process that we got to do public process. So, thank you very much. Moving on. Item 10, ordinance 26. 2026. Sure. I thought I could just announce it. Then everybody has to get ready. Everybody has to get ready and you know. All right. Okay. Item 10, ordinance 20264, planning file comde. Tell me I'm right. No, you're Oh, I'm right.

Yeah. Comde uh 000015-2026 clified fire resilience code. Second reading. Hey, good evening, mayor and council. Trent high with community development. Uh just following up um from the the meeting uh February 19th um if you remember correctly um we were going to adopt this code by reference uh and therefore had some additional notification requirements. Those have been fulfilled. Um so we do want to open up this item for public comment tonight. Um but I'm also happy to answer any additional questions that you have.

Okay. Thank you, Trent. Back to us. Any questions to staff about the second reading? Okay, we'll see none. Uh, anybody from the public like to come forward on the wildfire resilience code? No, they all left. Look at that. Okay, we'll close the public portion on that as well. Um,

when you make a motion on this ordinance, whoever makes a motion, would you read the entire tit? Sure. Thanks. So back to uh back to council and attaining a motion in item 10. Mayor promps I move to approve ordinance 2026-04 planning file comdev 00000015-2026 Colorado wildfire resilient resiliency code on its second reading. Okay. Motion to approve. Looking for a second. Council Townsley.

Second it. Motion is second. Any discussion? See none. Call for the question.

It passes 6. Thank you, Ryan. That was it for tonight since the other one's been continued. Last item. Um, moving into council comments. Start on my right tonight. Um, start with councelor Smith. There you go. I have nine topics. Mercifully, I'm going to highlight three. Um, and really do have nine here.

I so appreciate that. I'm sorry. I had a very human moment. All of that like I'll highlight three for now.

Ineloquence. Um and one is that um last time we met we heard a fairly brief and frankly modest report on a personnel work culture award that the city received and we all thought that was really cool. always said nice things, but I learned more detail about it since then and it's even more remarkable than I thought and just wanted to to comment that it wasn't simply a certificate that came in from some nomination. This is something that's been going on for a year working department by department and through all the employees to survey employees to learn techniques for better communication. A very extensive process that ended up with this award. So, it's just that much more worth celebrating. I think um the recent several the almost every meeting recently has had some appointment or reappointment of members to advisory boards and commissions and correspondingly there are some people who are finishing their terms or otherwise not not re-uping and I as far as I can tell we don't have a deliberate format for expressing appreciation to departing people serving on those commissions. Uh I suggest that we cook one up. Maybe it's as simple as a as a paper letter uh signed by all the city council members or uh in some fashion tangibly taking a moment to appreciate the many volunteer hours that goes in over three years of service from some really expert members of the community. So I'd suggest that we either administratively or maybe discuss at a work session um how to be more deliberate about thanking people. Um and

five and a half months ago, we had a convers we had a work session uh with this council to talk about u council meeting protocols um in in several different ways of of of propriety, of respect, of communications um and that discussion narrowed down at least initially to consideration of a policy regarding remote attendance at city council meetings. I don't think we've taken that up since and and it seems that we ought to.

Yeah, that's probably a little bit on me. Uh a few things have come up between the so that's on I was working on a draft and some of the input that council can give. So we'll try to get that the next couple of meetings. It's just me having to slide down the list on y'all were getting along and nobody's yelling at me. So, we heard tonight of all nights how big your workload is. It just seemed like a nice thing to kind of have done in case it comes up again. So, thank you. Appreciate that. And thank you, General. Thank you, Council W.

Good. Councelor Townsley. Sure. Push the button. Am I allowed to ask a question about something that's gone on here? Sure. With with you guys. Yeah. And I'll answer it all. Okay. The the thing that kept coming up, the spear piece. Are we part of that? Are we not part of that? What's what's the actual Yeah, we we did sign an the chief did sign an IGA on that. Um I think Steve and I really had talked about trying to bring that back for discussion with you guys at the next meeting, trying to bite out pieces at a time. Um so I think think that's I'd rather give you more background on it, get it to you here for the next couple weeks.

Okay. And how are we coming on that remote attendance thing? The other thing I actually did have something that I want, you know, if I can talk for eight more minutes, it will be much more effective. No,

you know, this is I don't know if anybody knows, but we've the three of us that are new here have been here for a year now. And somebody asked me over at the club the other day, you know, they said, "How do you like it? What are you guys doing that you feel like you're making any difference or anything else like that?" And I, you know, typically my answer to that is, "I'm enjoying it. I like the people I work with. I think we're, you know, we've got a good city staff. I, you know, it's it's generally a very positive thing on that." So, I just want to say thanks to the people that have welcomed us on here. Thanks to our city staff, everybody that's been here. Um, probably somebody's figured out by now that I'm more a proponent of small government, less spending, less doing of everything. The one thing that I would kind of like to see, and this is just me, this is not speaking for council, but just as we, you know, go forward, I'm going to try to keep this under eight minutes. you guys are not going to have any time is um it seems like you know there's a and this is all a new learning experience for me but it seems like a lot of people come up to us and it's usually a lot of questions that are okay we need money for this we need money for that we need money for this in my way of thinking there's there's some personal responsibility that's being given up when people come to us and say will you solve our all our problems and I don't know that we occasionally should not go back to people and So your your cir your circumstances are a lot to do with your own making. There's no mandate that says you have to live in Glenwood Springs. If you don't like our speed limits, there's states you can go to Montana and drive as fast as you want. You know, if you don't like our codes, if you don't like this, you can go somewhere else. And I I think that we're when we sit up here, somebody says, "Okay, here's a problem." And we go, "Okay, let's try to figure out how to solve that problem." And and when I had one of the things I was thinking about is when I had kids, I've still got kids, actually. haven't gotten rid of them. But they would come to me all the time and say, "I've got this problem." And they would look at me to solve it. And the easier thing was just to solve their problem for them. But as I looked back at it and and thought about it at the time, if I solve their problem, then

I'm not learning I'm not helping them to learn how to solve their problems. I'm not learning getting them to learn responsibility. And so I think I would really like to start looking at some of these decisions and going, are we really helping our people that are coming before us? or we, you know, just trying to solve their problems for them. That could be housing, that could be providing cars, that could be traffic, flop cameras, you know, whatever, whatever thing's coming up there. But I think we owe it to go, okay, which problem should we solve? I think city does a really good job of providing services. You know, the the sewers flush, the water comes out clean. You know, the police force is out there protecting us, fire department's out there protecting us. We're here listening to things. for trying to decide things in people's best interest, but is it really incumbent upon us to solve every problem that gets in front of us? And I question whether or not that it really is. So, I would hope to probably you'll probably hear me bring that up more in the next three years, but uh that's that's kind of my comments for the night and we're done.

Thank you. You got three minutes, guys. You got three minutes. Go. Thank you, Councelor Small. Uh since I was reminded with our adoption of the Colorado wildfire resiliency code of the fire trap that we have in West Glennwood that has only gotten worse since I first began to complain about it and I'd like to get an update on that status. I see the chief is here. I'm sure he could update me.

So, for anybody that doesn't know, I don't know. I think it's 260 down again. Maybe it's across from the new uh storage facility on Deemos property. There is there is a single family residence there that's affectionately known as the pallet palace. There is so much debris and junk and stored materials on this lot that it makes Sanford and Sun look like uh the White House. Huh? Is this the It's a single family residence lot. It's what?

Yeah. It's got a sign that says flea market. I don't remember ever seeing that sign. That's a different property. Yeah.

It's It's a property that has been in this kind of condition for well over a year. I was told when I started complaining about it a year ago that the neighbors had been complaining about it for a year. It's in the county. It's not in the city, but it is in the city's fire district. So, I've been trying to hold the chief's feet to the fire about it. And you recall, counselor, we provided a few different updates about that property. Um, every time it's come up, we provide you with the information we had, and I'll I'll continue to do that. So, that uh property resident or the person responsible for that property was issued a a citation, and he was ordered to appear in court. That court came and went a few Fridays ago. the defendant um was failed to appear in that matter. So, the court ordered him responsible for whatever impositions that they choose to to put on that individual. So, couple things. You're correct that is not in the city of Glenwood Springs. So, Glenwood Springs Police Department has no authority over there to any kind of enforcement. The fire department oversees fire hazards as we certainly know and those kinds of things. We do not have an enforcement arm in as part of the Glenwood Springs Fire Department to impose any kind of enforcement, citations, u anything like the jurisdiction I came from before, they had sworn arson investigators and they were like police officers. They had to go to the police academy. So, they could take those kind of actions. We do not have that mechanism. Certainly not in Glennwood Springs and I don't know about anywhere in in the state. So, to that end, uh this falls back on the planning the county's planning building department, community development, whatever they're called over there. Mr. John Plano is the person that's in charge over there. And so they said they're going to they're going to be dealing with this now moving forward. I do know that one option that came up was the property owner wanted the county to supply him with a large dumpster, the rolling kind. You drop it off and he was going to clean it up. Um again, that's outside our purview. I don't know where that stands. And then there's a conversation about fees and dumping. You know, we w we wave fees for that person. If they're indigent, they can't pay for the landfill fees and all

that. Again, that that's exceed the scope of what I do. But to answer your your question specifically, he has been held accountable. Whether we can agree on what that might be or not, the courts have dealt with that. It's in the hands of the judicial system and then enforcement by the county. Do any idea on the timeline with the county? I don't and I I don't know how that that process works. Mr. Hanley might be in a better position to understand if he doesn't comply with any kind of court order, what happens from there. if they kind of comes in and does it themselves and they bill him. Um I just I just don't have an an idea how that would work.

That would probably be the process if they got an enforcement order and he failed to comply that component of that they show up and clean it out, hire somebody probably to do that. But with the sheriff observing, we're very well aware of as a fire department. Certainly it's a concern for ours. There's a lot of exposures over there. Pretty dense neighborhood. But absolutely. we can and I'm downwind of it. So, I have those concerns also and and it's uh it's a very frustrating process for all of those neighbors and it and it it it's a uh a real stain on our government's ability to act in confidence of the citizens.

Thank you. Uh, Mayor Pro Tim Solinski,

I'm not pandering here, but I do want to acknowledge we have spent a lot of time listening to public comment and respectfully expressing appreciation for those coming before us with their concerns. I would like to also respectfully express appreciation for the law enforcement in the community, for our city staff who are trying to navigate these times. um you know things look different from a lens of information. So when you are where you're at and you look back on things, it's really easy to place judgment. um having grace in these moments and um it's really really hard to sit and listen to comments made from a place of passion and strong conviction that maybe aren't fully informed or accurate but no less heartfelt. And so I just want to say thank you. I appreciate the work you're doing. I appreciate the position you're taking. I appreciate the guidance you're giving us and uh I will be looking forward to when we can put this to best.

Thank you, Councelor Wymer.

Mr. Boyd, as city manager, you inherit a lot of problems. I have never once heard you deflect blame. blame it on a previous administration or a previous person or a different time place thought. You have you have taken everything directly. You have used the you know the the pronoun we we did this. This is our problem. This is our chance to fix it. We made this decision. has nothing to do with the fact that it was 20 years ago or 20 days ago. You you you stand up, you you take it um and you handle all of this seemingly with a lot of professionalism. And I thank you for that because it can't it can't be easy ever or especially with some of these late students. So I I have recognized this from day one when this issue came up. We did this. We decided that we missed that. We failed to do that and very few of us in this room were even were even here. But it's that continuity. It's that it's that responsibility. It's it's really been it's really been nice to see. Thank you.

Hear here. and he instills that in his staff also. The culture of the city and responsibility is improving continuously. Thank you all. Thank you guys. Thanks for your comments. City manager. Well, first of all, it sounds like I should get a raise. Just kidding. Just kidding. Pick up on that. [laughter] You didn't hear that? No, I did not. Thank you uh counselors for your comments. I appreciate that. Nothing for me. Hey, thank you, Carl. Because I'm always just um full of reassession.

Yeah, that's what I was looking for. I was say full of joy. Um uh I had sent you out earlier just that um we had anticipated having an exact session tonight, but we knew it was going to be kind of a tough evening, so um didn't get it on uh to talk about an update on um Mitchell Cooper, where that stands, as well as the road litigation. Just so you know, we um I had sent you out that that we got named as a third party defendant um in the road litigation. We'll be filing an answer on that probably towards the end of next week. It's um due I think 10 days. Uh anyway, I just wanted to give you an update. We were going to be doing that. Um so, you know, um and it's 8:04. Yeah, I know.

Yeah, it's time. Oh, right. That's as No, Mr. Mayor. Well, there was a whole bunch a whole bunch of emails were were admitted to the packet or but nothing specific as a as a correct. Thank you, Ryan. Mayor Promment. I think we may reconvene at our new favorite place to have a teal. Sounds great. Thank you. Entertaining a motion to adjourn. So moved. Looking for a second. Okay. Not from councelor Wymer. He wants to stay. He just proclaimed. Anybody give me a second, please. Councelor Towns. Second this.

Okay. And we got a call for the question. Thank you, Ryan. I got to read it. [laughter] We do. Yes. Councelor Townsley. Yes, Mayor Prom Zalinski. Yes, Mayor Dame. No, Councelor Wymer. Yes, Councelor Schmall. Yes, Councelor Smith.