City Council - Regular Meeting

I'm not here if that's for me. It's 5 o'clock. Are we just about ready? Do we havebody on Zoom? We going to start with Steve. No, I don't think so. What time did you talk to him? Yesterday. I talked to him a little while ago. How are you? Good. You um

Okay, everyone, we're going to get started. Good afternoon and welcome to the city of Steamboat Springs regular meeting number 2026-11, Tuesday, April 14th, 2026 at 5:00 pm. And Julie, would you please take roll call? Steve Montine here. Gail Gary, John Aosta here, Dave Barnes, he will probably not be joining us. He's not. No. Uh Amy Dixon here, Michael Pacino here. And Brian Swint here.

Okay, let's all rise for the pledge of allegiance. There's a flag behind me and one in the back of the room. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Our first piece of business this evening is to adjourn from our regular meeting and reconvene as the marijuana license authority. So I would ask for a motion to adjurnn and reconvene as the marijuana license authority. So moved. Second. Okay, we have a motion by councelor Gary, second by councelor Pacino. All those in favor say I.

Opposed. Okay, we are now into our marijuana license meeting. And we have um item number one is a resolution denying Tumbleweed Steamboat LLC's request for a waiver of the local production requirements at fourth in section 12-511 subsection 7 of the Steamboat Springs Retail Marijuana Code. So Kelly, do you want to come on down? And Dan, do you have anything to lead us off on this?

Sure. Um, as of this weekend, the lency had advised me that they wanted to request postponement of this hearing. Um, the lency's attorney is online and I would suggest you turn it over to him to find out if that is still the case and if so, um, ask him to state the grounds. Okay. Um, is the attorney online? Should be Mr. Nadav Asher. Hello everybody. Uh, can you state your name and address for the record, please? Yes. Um, my name is Nadav Ashner. My address is 165 South Union Boulevard, uh, sweet 901, Lakewood, Colorado 80228.

Okay. Would you like to make a statement, uh, addressing, uh, Mr. Foot's comments?

Uh, I I did seek a continuence and I do still think that a continuence is warranted. Uh, we have some some posture in the staff memo and recommendations submitted for tonight's hearing. uh that I I find concerning. The memo contains factual assertions that tumbleeed disputes. It incorporates allegations from a pending and unadjudicated state enforcement matter that was not a matter of public record. Uh and it did so without giving Tumbleweed notice or an opportunity to respond before now. U it includes letters from Tumbleweed's two direct competitors, each of whom has a direct financial interest in the city denying Tumbleeed's waiver request. Um, and it provides analysis of those letters in support of its recommendation to deny while giving no comparable weight to the materials that Tumbleweed submitted just last week at its deadline. Uh it was also presented to this council with a pre-drafted denial resolution and that was not the process last year when this body heard Tumbleweed's statement, heard public comment, deliberated and granted a waiver by motion as opposed to what is framed as a resolution denying uh before any evidence has been heard or deliberated by the board. I have a you know a number of additional items that if we move forward I will I will raise I will uh share with this this body. Uh but I do think a continuence is appropriate to give us adequate time to prepare uh to respond and submit additional materials to the the council uh directly responsive to what we believe to be incorrect allegations uh cited in the memo. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. And I would ask um Dan if um is there any um reason to offer a continuence or should we move on tonight?

Well, I I don't think as a matter of due process it's necessary to grant a continuence tonight. Um to the extent that the request is based on disputes as to facts, I mean that's the purpose of the hearing is to resolve these factual disputes. Um Mr. Ashner has asked for additional time to address materials that are presented to council. I mean I think I would say that the issues that are addressed in the staff report um are the same issues that were raised by the uh by the lency last year. I think it is reasonable to expect the lency to be prepared to address them tonight. And the list of the exhibits that um are in the package is is relatively short. Um there are letters from uh Tumbleeed's competitors. I guess Tumbleeed has not had an opportunity to see those until until very recently, but that's the nature of public comment. Um, with respect to the exhibits prepared by staff, these are for the most part all documents uh that are tumbleeed documents, uh, tumbleeed correspondents, for example. Uh, the timeline that Tumbleweed presented back in January. Um, there is a judgment in a court case involving Tumbleeed. So, I I I don't think as a matter of due process, it's necessary for you to grant a continuence. Now that being said, um certainly you could decide to grant the continuence regardless. Um I do think that there is a question of uh you know whether that would serve the interest of justice and having this matter resolved in a timely fashion. Um Tumbleweed is and has been operating for some time um out of compliance with the local production requirement. Um we do have other licenses who believe that that is unfair to them and the longer of this uh it takes to resolve this issue you know the the more that they will have to um you know compete on this playing field. I think that perhaps for that reason before you make a decision on the continuence requests you should see if um either of those entities would like

to weigh in on this request. Okay. Is either one of those entities in the room or online? Billow or Golden Leaf. Yes, you're referring to Dan. Correct. That's who I'm referring to. Thank you. Okay. Would you like to come down and make a a comment? And uh if you could hold it to three minutes, that would be great. And it just regarding the dis the the hearing. Yeah, that's allion request. Extension of the hearing or not continuence of the hearing.

Hi. Uh Charlie Petty, 795 Conifer Circle. Um it's my belief that Tumbleweed has had ample time to prepare. Uh they've been in uh acknowledgement of this law and uh their non-compliance for quite some time now. Um I don't believe that 30 days is going to reveal any additional information. So it's my belief that we should just continue forward. Okay. Thank you. Um is Golden Leaf online? I see there's Emily Kelly. Um, yes. Emily, are you with uh Golden Leaf? I am. I'm councel for Golden Leaf. Uh, Leaf Anderson.

Could I interrupt? I'm sorry, Emily. Um, could you turn your video on, please? Um, I am trying to There you go. If you could start with your name and address, please. Hi there. My name is Emily Kelly, 235th Street, Steamboat Springs, Colorado. I am counsel for Golden Leaf. I'm their attorney and I have been representing them since 2014. Okay. And would you like to make a comment regarding this request for continuence?

I just spoke with Golden Leaf Anderson who is one of the owners of Golden Leaf and uh it is our position today that Tumbleweed has had ample opportunity to um handle this matter. It has been over a year and so we would like to proceed. Okay, thank you for your comment. All right. Um, does anybody have any questions, more questions for Dan or um let's hear what your thoughts are on this continuance request? My Dan, my understanding is this is just about the the license and and and um tumble weed wishing to continue the sale without doing the 50% uh grow requirements.

Correct. That is the only issue presented before you tonight is whether or not to um grant or extend a waiver uh to that requirement. Since it's that narrow, I I see no reason for continuance. Okay. Other comments? Great. Yep. I agree. Same. Okay. Well, let's just make sure. Um then um let's do thumbs up for um or thumbs down for Do we need Do we need to We should ought to have a motion. We should have a motion. Okay. I make a motion to move to uh have the hearing held today and deny a continuence. Okay. Second. Second.

We have a motion from councelor Pino, second from councelor Augusta. All those in favor say I. I

opposed. Okay, we will continue on with the hearing tonight. Thank you all. Kelly, do you want to come on down? Thank you, President Montene. Good evening, councilors. Kelly Romero Heeny, deputy city manager. I'm here tonight on behalf of the city clerk's office which is part of the deputy deputy city manager department. Um and we're here with a proposed resolution regarding a waiver request from Tumbleweed Steamboat LLC. Tumbleweed is request um Tumbleweed is requesting that this body now as the marijuana licensing authority extend its waiver to the local production requirement set forth in section 12-511 of the Steamboat Springs Municipal Code. For reference, this code requires marijuana retail store licenses to produce 50% of their product locally within the city of Steamboat Springs. This section requires council to wave the local production requirement. Quote, in the event a retail marijuana store suffers a catastrophic loss of inventory due to fire, flood, or other cause beyond the lency's control. End quote. The city clerk's office recommends that the marijuana license authority licensing authority deny tumble weed's request for a waiver for the following reasons. Tumbleweed weed has not maintained a cultivation facility in Steamboat Springs since October of 2023 and staff issued a notice of violation in October of 2024. In response, Tumbleweed requested a waiver of the local production requirement from this body on the grounds that it had experienced

catastrophic loss uh in part due to mold contamination that was discovered in 2022 and 2023. That waiver request was heard and granted by this body on January 7th, 2025 to give the Lency a year to come into compliance with the local production requirement. That waiver expired January 7th, 2026 and tumble weed has not come into compliance. Staff notes in your packet materials that they have had a number of options to comply with the local production requirement. And in this in this time during this time including cultivation at another site, the purchase of a facility or the purchase of marijuana from other local licences. While meeting the terms of the city's local production requirement may require significant investments, the city adopted a comprehensive regulatory framework for retail marijuana in order to protect the public health, welfare, and safety of the community and to ensure that its impacts are offset by community benefits. It appears that Tumble Weed has made a business decision not to comply with the city's marijuana regulations, one that is not driven by catastrophic loss, but by cost. For these reasons and those stated in your packet, the city clerk's office is recommending that the marijuana licensing authority deny the waiver request. In addition to myself, your city clerk Julie Franklin is here as well as Sabrina James also with the city clerk's officer office. We're all available to answer questions. Of course, if you have legal or process questions, you have your city attorney, Danfoot.

Thank you, Kelly. Do we have any questions for Kelly or Sabrina or Julie or Dan? Well, I think I just want to start off and say the packet was very detailed this week on this and so um I went through and read everything on there including our minutes from the last time and so I just first of all not really a question cuz I have a full understanding. I'd hear what my colleagues have to say. It's more of a discussion, but that's because the packet was so well done. And I just I want to say that there was a lot of information in there and it kind of answered a lot of questions before I had to come here. So, personally, I don't need to, but I would love to hear if anyone has this and I'm sure we're going to have a good discussion.

Okay. Others? Yeah. So, I have I have I have a question. Um, I understand the the catastrophic loss in terms of the mold, but that was over a year ago. It has the has Tumble Weed conveyed any information about why they could not come in compliance um in the past year. Anyone? Anyone?

Tumble has submitted documents to the city that are in your packet. I believe they're attachment nine. Um there is not a sort of narrative linking those together and I think that is probably what Mr. Ashner will be presenting later. Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Hearing none, we will go then to Mr. Asher. And Dan, did you want to

I I I did want to mention that Mr. Ashner did request that the time for his presentation be increased and uh he did he requested an hour. Um I think it is up to you to decide how to uh how to address that request. I did speak to the council president and relate to Mr. Ashner that uh uh that you were perhaps open to a 30-minute presentation, but I think that that should we should let Mr. Ashner know how much time he's going to have before he starts. Um, does anyone have an objection to giving Mr. Asher up to 30 minutes? I do. Okay.

Um, so I'm just curious why the information uh was not provided to us in advance in Mr. Asher um that he's going to review. And I I've seen some of the letters that had come in um on Rainbow um and I just want to make sure that um we have a standard 15 minute for all um folks. So why 30 minutes for this particular applicant? Okay.

I I mean I I think Mr. Ashner should should definitely address this himself, but I I will tell you that um procedurally we are in a little bit of a different posture in that the kinds of proceedings that usually come to you as quasi judicial or planning matters where there has generally been a planning commission uh andor a director decision and so usually there's more process that has occurred. Um so in that way this this proceeding is a little bit different and I would say that would be a justification to give additional time.

Yeah, I I mean I don't have a problem with 30 minutes. I have a big problem with 60 minutes. Um, we're here to speak specifically on the waiver and not any licensing revotion or nothing like that. We're here talking about the waiver that we gave in January of 25. And so, keeping it to that, if if we start to get off into tangents that have not anything to do with the waiver, I would be remissed to not say don't waste my time. So, I'm fine with 30 minutes, but don't waste my time. And Dan, just to clarify, as you said, we're not setting any sort of precedent that outside of No, I I would not it's proceeding.

I would not tell you next week that now you've got to give everybody 30 minutes. Can we ask why 30 minutes is needed? I'm happy to chime in if the council would like to hear from me. Be great.

Go ahead. The reason for the request for additional time is that the materials in front of you were not affirmatively provided to me or my client. We just happened to search for the agenda over the weekend. Uh and had we not, we wouldn't have seen any of the details uh that are before you that you have reviewed in advance of this hearing. And so we're requesting the opportunity to respond to those materials where we didn't have them by the deadline, our deadline of April 8th to submit our own materials. Had I known all of this would be in front of this council, uh we would have included many additional materials in the record. Okay. Yes.

Can we get clarification? I think Dan, you mentioned the documents are specific to the public comment or are there more documents? Well, there are uh eight attachments submitted by staff um that are in the main packet uh and that two of those are the public comment. Uh there's another attachment that incorporates all of the materials submitted by um the lency and then there were uh two letters and a third document that were added to the rainbow I believe is correct. So that I think I think those are the documents that Mr. um Ashner references including the staff memo.

All right. Thank you. So, I'm I'm okay with 30 minutes, but I asked Council President Montene to please make sure they stay on track and that we're only talking about the issue in front of us. Um, I'm a little disappointed that um to hear that they don't understand the process for these hearings. Um, so I ask you, President Lent, to keep it on track. Yes. And I would also urge us all to be thinking of are we talking about things that are relevant tonight? And if anybody feels we're off track, um you're welcome to share that as well. So, do we have um a thumbs up on giving Mr. Ashner up to 30 minutes? I can do that.

Yep. Okay. Have the majority. All right. Mr. Ashner, um you have 30 up to 30 minutes and you are now on. Are you sharing a screen or anything or are you just uh May I ask does does every member on the council have a packet in front of them that that they can access readily or would it be helpful if when I address exhibits we submitted I share my screen with those exhibits? We we all have access to all the information then I think it'll just be a statement and I don't believe I'll need to share anything. Thank you. Okay, go ahead.

All right. Thank Thanks everyone. Good evening. Um again my name is Nadav Ashner. Uh I'm an attorney representing Tumbleweed Steamboat. I appreciate your time today. Um we're here because Tumbleeed has been unable to meet the 50% local sourcing requirement under section 12-511 subsection 7 of the Steamboat Municipal Code. And we are asking this council to grant a waiver of that requirement through January 1 of 2027. Uh I want to start with a few pieces of context that I think will help frame what what you're being asked to decide today. Uh, first, this body granted Tumbleweed a last year. The circumstances that led to that waiver have not materially changed, and if anything, the constraints on Tumbleweed's ability to to source locally have tightened for reasons that I'll explain in a couple of minutes. Uh, second, the ordinance itself anticipates situations just like this. Uh, subsection 7 expressly provides for a waiver where a lenc's inability to comply is due to causes beyond its control. Uh that provision is in there because the council that enacted this legislation understood um that a a 50% local sourcing requirement only works if there's sufficient local supply to support it. And where there isn't a waiver is the appropriate and and in fact the intended remedy. Third, the rule itself sunsets entirely on on January 1st of 2027, which is less than nine months from now. So effectively, we're asking for relief through the end of a rule that the city has already decided to retire. Uh, as I mentioned before when when you asked for the basis for the continuence, the posture of the memo submitted for tonight was alarming to us. It contains factual assertions that we dispute that we do not believe are actually relevant to uh what this body is deciding tonight. Uh, and it deviates from the process that that took place last year. Uh, and again, those materials were not given to us affirmatively. We only found them because we were proactive in

looking for this agenda. Um, as mentioned multiple times now, I submitted a letter addressed to Mr. Foot over the weekend on Saturday evening requesting that continuence. He declined. Uh, I've renewed the request. I understand this board wants to proceed. You know, we're we're not asking to avoid this hearing. We're just asking for a fair one. There's a bit of a broader procedural concern here as well. Um, just a few weeks ago, the city filed a petition before an independently appointed hearing officer seeking to deny Tumble Weed's renewal applications. That formal proceeding is governed by the city's municipal code, which affords procedural protections for both sides. The staff memo asks this council to resolve many of those same factual disputes informally in tonight's waiver hearing and without those protections in place. So, these disputed issues should be adjudicated in the formal proceedings. city itself chose to invoke and not preddecided here in a context where we haven't had an opportunity to prepare responsive materials, seek discovery or subpoena or cross-examine witnesses to challenge the memo's factual assertions. Uh on that note, I'd like to draw your attention to a particular attachment to the memo. It's attachment five. It's a letter from Gatsby Holdings LLC. Um they do business as Billow Premium Cannabis. They're one of three cannabis licences in the city. Uh its owner submitted a letter directly to Mr. Foot dated to February 4th of this year. Uh and the opening line of that letter reads, "Thank you for your time last week with a quick update regarding license status for Tumbleweed. Per our discussion, this document summarizes key points regarding Tumbleweed's compliance with the vertical inte vertical integration city code." End quote. The staff memo and a letter that Mr. Foot sent me. yesterday, which I believe is in the the pack in front of you, identify this attachment as public comment. The tumbleeed first

made its request for the for a waiver on January 22nd of this year, and city staff did not inform us of today's hearing until February 27th. Public comment is a comment at a noticed public hearing where all parties have an equal opportunity to participate. Billow's letter was sent to city staff 23 days before Tumbleweed was ever informed that any proceeding was underway. Evidently, the city attorney was meeting privately with one of Tumbleweed's competitors to discuss the ramifications of an adverse determination to Tumbleweed's license weeks before Tumbleeed knew it would have this hearing. whatever label is ultimately applied to it. The letter is advocacy from our competitor, submitted privately to city staff before a hearing was noticed and before we had an opportunity to respond. That same letter asks this city if Tumbleeed's license is not renewed to allow Billow to open a second retail store at Tumbleeed's current location. One of the signatories to that letter, uh, John Petty, who just spoke a moment ago, sat in this room last year at the waiver hearing and spoke in support of Tumbleeed's waiver. He's now asking the city to give his company Tumbleeed space and to modify other city ordinances to allow Bill to operate a second dispensary. I I raised this because council should weigh the memo's conclusions and recommendations with full awareness of who had city staff's ear before the memo was written. And I want to now address some of the factual errors in the memo and its attachments as we go. So we're here because Tumbleeed can't currently cultivate or manufacture its own product within Steamboat Springs city limits. That was the case last year when the council granted a waiver and it remains equally true today. We've been searching actively for a location to change that reality since early 2025. In fact, I think since since uh later maybe 23 or even 24,

we've been working Tumbo's been working with Chris Saias, who's a licensed commercial real estate broker, and he's been operating in the Simo Springs market since 2017. Uh you can refer to the first four exhibits that we submitted in in the packet. Exhibit one is a letter from Mr. size that he wrote in advance of last year's hearing uh in which he explained the challenges in locating viable commercial space in Steamboat. I believe the council has all read it so I won't quote from it. Uh exhibits two and three and four, our email exchanges inquiring about cultivation and manufacturing locations. Mr. Scas's response to our emails and our phone increase has been consistent. He has not found a suitable space available for marijuana cultivation or manufacturing in Steamboat Springs. Warehouse prices have increased substantially since the ordinance was written 9 years ago, eight years ago. Rents are up and owners associations are prohibiting cannabis related uses in their buildings. Uh I want to note something here that I raised in last year on last year's record. Um, in October of 2023, Madison Marzerio, uh, the owner's daughter and someone who has long long been helping manage, uh, Tumbleweed Steamboat, sent an email directly to the city clerk's office asking essentially if there is nowhere in Steamboat for Tumbleeed to operate a cultivation facility, what should they do to comply with the local source rule? Madison didn't receive a response, but Tumbleweed's licenses were renewed a few months later with no further comment or inquiry from the city. The city raised the non-compliance with local source rules later in 2024, and that ultimately resulted in Tumbleeed requesting the hearing last year and this body granting a waiver last year. But the issues affecting Tumbleweed's ability to source enough product to comply with the rule just haven't resolved since then.

Uh the staff memo argues that Tumbleeed misrepresented facts in January 2025 by attributing cultivation facility closures to its predecessors. And I I know that that council members have reviewed that um in advance of today's hearing. So I want to address that directly uh briefly before going into um some of the other uh efforts we've taken to comply. This this business initially held 12 grow licenses at six different facilities. All but one of them were in the same complex with the same landlord. Uh some of them were shut down in 2019 and 2020 due to mold. And when we took ownership, we learned that some of the facilities we taken over had serious environmental problems as well that were not disclosed to us. We learned that the prior owners were manipulating test samples to pass testing and that is not our practice. And so when when we took over, we shut that practice down and we learned that it was uh practically impossible to cultivate compliant product. So, we made a very difficult decision to shut down facilities in 2020 and 2021 because of mold uh and other environmental hazards. In 2021, however, the landlord for all but one of the remaining I'm sorry, two of the remaining cultivation sites sent us notices of nonrenewal. And so, uh, even if we had wanted to renew, um, some of these licenses, these leases at that time in 2021, we couldn't because our landlord said, uh, we're we're done here. The landlord wanted to renovate the properties and turn them into luxury.

May May I interject? We we are rehashing information that we that was presented over a year ago. Um, I I was not on the council, but I've read all the material and and we're familiar with with the past history. where you want want to understand why you'd want a waiver after you've had a year year waiver.

Respectfully, sir, I will address that. I promise, but the memo asserts that we made intentional misrepresentations to this body, and I think that warrants a a little bit of time to explain what I think the record shows and what actually happened. Um, but I am almost done with this little bit. So, if you'll bear with me for just one or two more minutes, I'll be on to the next piece. Um, on the manufacturing side, there were two separate events outside of our control that caused us to lose that vertical. Uh, first was that the original landlord, who was the same landlord for most of these growth facilities, declined to renew the lease, sent us a notice of non-renewal in 2021. That forced Tumbleeed to relocate. They went through a lengthy and expensive change of location process. And then at the new location prior to the termination of the lease at the end of 2023, the landlord sold the building and told us to vacate. So yes, we Tumbleeed shut down some facilities after they took ownership. But I don't believe the transcript of last year is in any way inconsistent with these facts and despite the city's characterizations, remediation was just not an option available to us at the time and it's not an option available to us now. and the non-renewal of our leases was not voluntary voluntary, excuse me, in any legal sense or meaningful sense of the word. We kept the city informed of these developments and through uh that October email from Madison Marzerio, we direct directly inquired about the local source rule. Um, to the extent this council is inclined to credit the city's misrepresentation narrative, uh, we'd welcome the opportunity to provide a summary of all of the leases, each facility, each termination date, and each reason for termination so that this body can evaluate the full picture rather than rely on the staff memo's account. Um, but while we believe the misrepresentation framing to be incorrect, it also, I think, misses the point. The question before this council is not who managed exits from those facilities, it's why tumbleeed has no

production capacity today. And the problem was always the mold and that predated our ownership. Uh and so the answer is the same regardless of what happened in 2019 through 2021. Uh the the staff memo itself acknowledges this. If you look at section three on page three, staff quote recommends that council focus on the closure of tumble weeds cultivation facilities in 2022 and 2023 due to mold contamination end quote. Uh the memo states that mold quote could be viewed as a catastrophic loss beyond Tumbleeed's control and that this loss may have justified a temporary waiver for Tumbleeed to restart its cultivation operations or find a local source for its product. End quote. Uh these are the city's own words, the staff's own words and recommendations. And the 2025 waiver was justified on exactly those grounds and the circumstances it just that justified it then haven't changed. In 2022, focusing on those two years, Tumbleweed lost its cultivation facility at 2835 Downhill Plaza, unit 601, after receiving non-renewal uh notice from the landlord. It was not our choice. We were told to leave. In 2023, they lost the facility on uh 200513th Street because they couldn't afford to remedy environmental hazards that were inherited in the building uh that it took over at at the time of the closing of its purchase. Um there there's one more point that that bears here on the question of waiver. Uh and that is that the city clerk confirmed last year that um directly in response to a question from council member Mcinley that there was no enforcement of this ordinance prior to 2023. So for the seven years after it was enacted, the city didn't enforce it. Uh they reported that they were laser focused on licensing renewals and compliance and that the ordinance wasn't at the forefront of their their minds. Um but in their memo they they repeatedly discuss conduct that predate uh their initial enforcement of the

rule. Uh and I think that's relevant context for evaluating our compliance history in in the face of the accusations in the memo. Um the memo itself now offers this council four options that tumbleeed had and has to comply with the sourcing requirement. The first is to remediate the mold contamination in its cultivation facilities in 2023. Uh the second is to commence cultivation at a new site. The third is to purchase a site for a cultivation facility and the fourth is to purchase from local lences. So I want to address each of those uh directly. on remediation in 2023. Let's be very clear about what that means. The mold was not surface mold. Mold was in the walls. It was in the insulation. It was in the venting under the tiles. This wasn't a cosmetic issue. It required substantial demolition and rebuilding. Uh in fact the landlord for those facilities after uh uh vac terminating the leases ultimately did exactly that demoed and converted the facilities into residential apartments. Uh Tumbleeed estimated that cost at the time to be at least $300 or $400,000 per unit uh and and they just couldn't afford to do that. Beyond the cost, by 2023, we no longer had the right to occupy most of those facilities, and you can't demo and rebuild and remediate a building that you either don't have access to or that you're not sure you're going to have long term because the relationship with a landlord is soured. Um, the staff memo characterizes Tumbleeed's decision not to spend that amount of money as a business decision, but spending hundreds of thousands of dollars that you don't have to renovate facilities for a rule that the city has already voted to retire in facilities that you don't know will be long-term homes for you is not a viable compliance pathway. It's an economically irrational outcome that no reasonable analysis

actually supports. Uh the waiver provision in the rule exists precisely for situations where compliance would be economically catastrophic uh on leasing or developing or purchasing uh these are options two and three in the memo. Uh a new site. This is exactly what Tumbleweed has been working toward for well over 15 months. They engaged the real estate broker. They've searched for properties online. They've not found suitable space available in Steamboat Springs. Um, as this council knows, marijuana cultivation and manufacturing are not open zoning. The these activities are relegated to only a few zoning classifications in only a few pockets of the city. Uh, and Tumbleweed has just not been able to find a viable property. Even if they were to find one today or last week or last month, the process to go through permitting and then build out a facility for cultivation is going to take no less than than six months, probably longer. And then they still have to cultivate and get through a harvest cycle, which the the quickest that I'm aware of is three months. Most people grow closer to four. Uh and that doesn't allow for any time to actually sell the locally grown product before the end of the year and the end of the rule. And so even a perfectly executed build out that we start, you know, tomorrow, um it just isn't going to get tumble weed to a 50% local source and compliance for 2025. Um, a couple of comments that were made uh a few minutes ago before I started were that Tumbleweed is has been operating out of compliance for some time, but that's not the case. Uh, the Tumbleeed is operating in compliance with the waiver granted last year. And while that did expire in January of 2026, they immediately requested a new waiver and explained to the city the basis for the request uh some of which I will share um in a moment here. Um

and then you know on on purchasing from local lences which is the fourth option that the staff memo recommends we take or should have taken. Tumbleweed has been doing so and I'll go into more detail on that. Uh multiple attachments to the memo characterize the local sourcing requirement as a vertical integration rule. It's not that vertical integration requires a business to produce what it sells. This section of the rule requires this rule requires local sourcing. And because we don't have the means to produce, um what that means in practice is that we must purchase from our competitors within stebo city limits or be in violation of the rule. Uh at the 2025 hearing, Mr. Flick correctly told this council that there's not a state mandate for the rule. it was a decision made by a prior council and that the the council could repeal at any time before the 2027 sunset. To my knowledge, Steboat is the only city in Colorado that imposes this type of rule uh and restriction. And I raise this because I think that um you know, it warrants understanding what the city is being asked to enforce. And that's a mandatory local purchasing obligation that forces Tumbleweed to buy from competitors in one of the most constrained commercial real estate markets in the state and within a geographic boundary so narrow that compliance has been structurally impos structurally impossible for us given that we have no cultivation capacity of our own. Both the rule and the conditions to last year's waiver require that we attempt to source from the local market. But the market here does not support the variety of products that get tumbleeed to 50% of all the products sold in its store. There are only two other licenses in Steamboat Springs whom Tumblee can source from. Uh the first is Billow and the second is DNC Medical Marijuana LLC which does business as Golden Leaf. Uh you heard from both of them and they

both submitted letters for tonight. Uh, Tumbleweed has attempted to purchase from Golden Leaf a few times over the past year, but Golden Leaf does not sell wholesale flour and it has only had excess concentrate available for Tumbleeed to purchase one time. Uh, exhibit five in the packet I submitted is a transfer report identifying the products Tumbleeed did purchase from Golden Leaf. While Tumbleeed also attempted to purchase additional product, it just never worked out. Um you'll see in the packet in October of 2025 towed placed an order for product from Golden Leaf through Leaf Link and that is a a cannabis wholesale marketplace on which businesses can list their available product. Uh as you'll see in that exchange, Golden Leaf canled the order because of equipment malfunction in their lab. They apologized. They were very uh courteous about it, you know, professional, but they said they would reach back out to Tumbleeed when a product when product became available for wholesale again. Uh you can see exhibit 6A for that exchange. Golden Leaf did not reach back out. Uh and so after I think four months, Tumbleweed contacted them again in February of 2026. Uh Golden Leaf's lab director informed Tumbleweed that Golden Leaf has had ongoing mechanical issues, that they're trying to keep their own store stocked, and that they don't know when they'll be able to offer wholesale product again. And that's in exhibit 6B. I note this because the memo includes the letter from Golden Leaf's Council as attachment six. And while the letter is largely a vertical integration policy discussion, it does conclude by stating, quote, Tumbleweed has not contacted Golden Leaf regarding wholesale product. End quote. And while that assertion is really damning, it's also not true. Um, so that leaves Billow as Tumbleeed's only meaningful local source. And Tumbleeed does buy from Billow regularly. Uh, Billow supplies Tumbleeed with flour and concentrates and very occasionally

edible products. Uh, if you look at exhibits 7A and 7B, um, you see that Tumbleeed has made 13 separate flower purchases since January of 2025. Um, and if you look at 8A and 8B, you'll see 10 concentrate purchases during the same time frame, the last of of which included a few edible products. Uh, exhibits 9 and 10 are a few examples of emails coordinating product purchases with Billow, but even still, product purchased from Billow represents a negligible amount of the total sales that Tumbleeed made in 2025, uh, something like 5%. But that number isn't a measure of Tumbleeed's efforts or its commitment to complying with the local source rule. It's it's a measure of the limited types of product this market can supply. Uh, the the 5% number can't grow enough to to matter. Even if Bow had unlimited capacity to cultivate flour and manufacture concentrates, uh the flour and concentrates together only represent about 30% of what uh Tumbleweed sells from its dispensary. Tumbleeed's top selling products are products we don't get from Bow. Edibles, vape cartridges. You know, these are things that Bow either never or very rarely supplies to us, largely because they don't manufacture some of these things. So even if Tumbleweed bought bought 100% of all of its flour and all of its concentrate from Bow and stocked nothing but Bowo flour and concentrates on its shelves, it would still only be sourcing about 30% of local product because c customers prefer other products. So the 50% threshold is not just difficult to reach. If you can't grow and manufacture your own, it's mathematically unreachable given the types of products the market can provide here. And once again, Billow and Golden Leaf are Tumbleweed's competitors. When Billow did sell to Tumbleweed, it did so at a substantial markup compared to average industry rates. Billow's letter, which again is attachment five, states in the second bullet point on the first

page that quote, "Billow provided cannabis products to Tumbleeed at their request and at market wholesale rates to assist their efforts toward compliance." End quote. But if you take a look at exhibit 11, statewide average market rate for retail flour right now, as published by the Colorado Marijuana Enforcement Division, is $648. For all of 2025, it sat around the same $650 mark. Billow charges Tumbleweed $1,300 per pound, which is double that amount. And you could take a look at exhibit 12 to see some of Billow's invoices. Uh, Tumbleweed pays that premium as a condition of last year's waiver, but the cost of Billow's product is substantially higher than the cost of product that Steamboat can source from outside city limits. I've included as exhibit 13 an email from Tumbleeed's purchasing manager comparing Billow's price per pound versus other vendors that Tumbleeed regularly purchases from. Uh, as you can see, Tumbleweed routinely pays 40% or more for flour that it gets from Bow compared to other sources. And our sales data shows that Tumbleeed's customers don't want to buy Billow products from Tumbleeed when they can get the same products down the down the street, probably for cheaper. So, Tumbleweed can't control what its customers choose to buy. When a billow product and a competitor's product sit on the same shelf, customers will consistently choose the competitor. Tumbleeed constantly has excess Billow inventory that it can't sell. And enforcement of the rule would not just require Tumbleeed to buy from Bow, which it does. It would require Tumbleeed to stop carrying the products as customers actually want to purchase from Tumbleeed and instead replace them with Tumbleeed's competitors products that they can get down the road. So on top of the pricing premium uh you know Billow also requires a premium I'm sorry requires payment on delivery and that's you know not

that's unlike most other vendors Tumbleeed works with so the cash flow burden is compounded at every purchase as well when when we buy from from local. The rule itself and the condition to Tumbleweed's 2025 waiver require Tumbleweed to absorb a significant and permanent cost disadvantage for the sake of compliance with a requirement it can't meet and that's set to expire in less than 9 months. I really I hope this illustrates that Tumbleweed's commitment to local sourcing is real. It's not it's not symbolic. um my client has paid a meaningful premium on the limited product it could source knowing all the while it would still have to come before you today and engage in this waiver process. So the rule I think an analogy here is you know it's the equivalent of requiring every liquor store in Steamboat Springs to source at least 50% of all the alcohol that that that store sells from Mountain Tap or Storm Peak or Yampa Valley Brewery. It's not just beer but all spirits and wine as well. That rule doesn't exist for liquor. No city in Colorado imposes anything like this elsewhere. It exists only in Steamboat, only for marijuana by decision of a prior council who agreed to sunset it and with no state mandate requiring it. So despite what may have been good intentions um to stimulate local stimulate local economy when enacting the rule, it has significantly prejudiced tumbleeed. It's forced tumbleeed to pay anti-competitive prices and created a protected market for competitors. Tumbleeed has done what was required under it by the conditions to last year's waiver. It has uh sourced what it could from available local suppliers. It's paid a premium to do that. It spent the last year and more searching for a path back to its own local production. Uh but it's come up empty. the 50% requirement is not only out of reach uh but it's out of reach not through any failure or effort of intent but because the local supply just

simply doesn't exist at the scale the ordinance requires unless you can grow your own. The the ordinance anticipates exactly this kind of situation and a waiver is appropriate here as it was last year. So, we respectfully ask this council to grant the waiver of the 50% sourcing requirement through 20 January 1 of 2027 when the rule terminates by its own terms. Um, you know, for the record, I do want to note that our participation tonight shouldn't be construed as a waiver of our rights to seek judicial review of any adverse decision uh or of any constitutional claims about the rule itself um and arising from application of the ordinance. But, uh, council members, truly, I thank you. I know that was a lot of information. Um, and I know you've heard a lot of it last year, but I think it it bears repeating and we appreciate your patience. I think I'm under the 30 minutes. Um, Sheri Marzario, who is the owner of Tumbleeed Steamboat LLC, would like to speak very briefly to her efforts to find a new location. And then I I believe Madison Marzario, her her daughter and one of the managers, um, uh, can address some of the purchasing dynamics that I raised in a little bit more detail. And after that, we are happy to try and answer any questions. Thank you very much.

Okay. Thank you. Um, Dan, is there anything you would like to I Are we waiting for? Are we waiting for the other two? I don't see anybody on. Uh, Sher is on. If I hope she can unmute herself and speak for I think she's just got a, you know, a few.

I'm sorry, I'm trying to start my video. Okay. Uh, hello. Hello, my name is Sheri Marzerio. I am the owner of Tumbleeed Steamboat and over the last couple of years, I've been searching for a new cultivation and extraction space in the city of Steamboat so we can try to comply with this local source rule. I've worked with a commercial real estate broker for over 15 months, and I've also searched online listings directly at loopnet.com, the agency, and the Steamboat Group. Every inquiry has come back the same. either there's nothing available or the property is not zoned for cannabis cultivation or extraction. I've been making an effort, but I haven't found any spaces in Steamboat Springs for what we need. I just wanted the council to understand that I I didn't take the uh waiver lightly and I've put my best efforts forward. It's just a restricted zoning area and it's been very difficult.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you.

Madison, are you there? Hi. Yes. Madison Marzerio, uh, Denver, Colorado. I am Sherry's daughter. I did happen to work with Tumbleweed over the course of the last six years. Thank you everyone for your time. I really just wanted to reiterate uh or put into perspective what Nadav had mentioned earlier. There's no industry that I'm aware of, whether it be in the United States, Colorado, or Steamboat, that requires an industry to purchase 50% of their products from local sourcing. Again, just to emphasize that for everyone, this isn't just beer that we would be talking about from a local brewery. This is all of the alcohol that is sold across any of the restaurants or bars. I know that a few of you do own and operate your own businesses as well. I'd like you to put yourself in our position or put yourself in the position of someone else that is not reaping the benefits of this regulation or ordinance that is to sunset in January. I've been in the industry for over 10 years at this point. I've seen a lot of changes across multiple states, specifically Colorado. I think it's fair to say Billow has done a phenomenal job of bringing credibility and recognition into the state of Colorado for premium flour as well as premium concentrates. I personally myself am a huge fan of Bellow products. They're always clean, very tasteful, and they win several awards. However, the market has shifted drastically. Golden Leaf, I believe, is a great example of that. right now they're struggling to source or they're struggling to keep products on their shelf themselves. Um that disallows us to purchase anything from Golden Leaf. Granted, Golden Leaf does not have as great of a reputation as Billow has. So that leaves us with Billow to purchase from. The purchasing patterns for

consumer behaviors are completely out of our control. I can't have a customer come in to a dispensary and say, "You need to order Billow or you need to purchase Billow." When I have a rosin gummy from Dialed In, one of the top gummy brands in in Colorado, next to a gummy from Bow that's not live resin, it's or rosin, it's distillate. They're always opting for that dialedin gummy. Unless I remove every other category or every other brand, there's no way that I can control the consumer behavior patterns to purchase just from Billow. Sure, I can offer the products which we have. Can you uh finish up in the next 30 seconds or so, please?

Yep. We've um done a great job with sourcing this stuff. Again, we can't control what the consumer ends up buying. Um if you've looked at the marijuana enforcement division and insights for the state of Colorado, we've had a huge transition over the last 12 years um that this law has or this ordinance has been in place. Flower isn't the top category right now. Um there's other other product types that aren't available in Steamboat. So I will leave it with that that we are trying to source everything that we can. We cannot control the consumer behavior and I don't think the ordinance is consistent or fair across the city of Steamboat, let alone the state of Colorado for the marijuana enforcement division.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um before we open it up for any questions, is there anything Dan that you would like to address from uh what Mr. Ashner said

um yeah briefly uh Mr. Ashner alluded to an MEED document uh which he considered to be confidential and there was some information in the memo uh that was drawn from me documents. U Mr. Asher has not provided to me any sort of legal authority as to why these documents might be confidential. So I think that you should go ahead and disregard that argument um in considering the evidence that's been presented to you. Um Mr. Ashner also suggested that I had been in communication with uh Billow and somehow that that was improper. Uh I did have a conversation with um with Billow regarding the status of uh of Tumblebee Tumbleeed's licensing. Uh I have also had um conversations with Mr. Ashner that Billow was not party to. So that's just sort of you know part and part of the process of being the city attorney and answering people's questions. Um uh and Mr. did talk about the date um at which um Tumbleweed requested this hearing. Uh there was an informal inquiry I believe on January 22nd, but the uh formal request did not come in until February 23rd. Um and then uh Mr. Ashner objected to the fact that there are some factual questions that have been presented to you tonight. Uh that will also be relevant to the licensing hearing that has been scheduled before the hearings officer. Uh that's just the reality of things. Um there are some overlapping factual issues. That does not mean that you cannot consider them tonight. And so I would um recommend that you dis disregard that objection and go ahead and consider uh the information that's been presented in the packet. And then finally um I would like to echo the comments Mr. Ashner made about vertical integration versus local sourcing. Um vertical integration is requiring you know the indust the lency to produce their own marijuana and uh that concept

um was part of the state regulations in 2013 and it was the city that was the city's original approach to this issue. Uh in 2019 the regulation that was adopted is it's not vertical integration it's local sourcing. So it doesn't matter who grows it but it has to be produced locally. So, um I I think that some documents refer to vertical integration, but what we are really talking about tonight is local sourcing or local production. Um that is all I have. Okay. Thank you. Does anyone on council have any questions for either attorney at this point?

I have a I have a comment. Throughout the presentation, there was an assumption that that this will sunset. um the the vertical integration piece, you know, is going to sunset in January. Um that may be so unless we re revisit that with council, but I would be recommending that council direct staff to relook at this uh before this sunset. So I would say you you know cannot go with the assumption that this is going that this requirement is going away. Well, in fact, we will be discussing that that uh in a few short months.

Uh Steve, I had a question. So, um, and this could be for Sherry or Nadev or anyone that want to answer it. I'm considering just looking at, um, 15 months ago, you came here and asked for a waiver. And during the minutes that I read um, of that meeting, and I was at that meeting, we um, we gave them the waiver and asked them to find a solution. What I also noticed throughout the entire minutes of that meeting was how majority of council on at that time was amicable to opening up the local source manufacturing to all of route county. I mean that that that's a prevailing comment by Gail. You had said it. I had said it. Uh there are others that had said it. It's it's in the minutes. So, as I'm looking through this and I'm wondering that we knew or you may may not have known. My question is this. Did you know that at January 15 months ago, 12 months ago, that you were finding a problem with finding a a place to have a grow facility within the city limits that there was an option from council saying we should expand this greater? Did you even consider that as an option? and and now you're coming to us 15 months later and saying there's just nothing in city of Steamboat Springs.

If that's directed at me, I appreciate the question. Um sir, uh the answer is we we do routinely source from route county uh outside of city steamboat city of steamboat limits. But the conversation last year while very robust on this topic, you're you're right, I remember it vividly. Uh ultimately there was no finding to expand the ordinance and uh one of the counselors I cannot remember whom at this point said something to the effect of well should we have tumble weed submit regular reports and that was shot down in the final motion that passed that the council said you have a waiver your two conditions to compliance are to try and source locally and try and find a location to to cultivate your own uh in the city uh and so we didn't directly reach out to the clerk and um say you know hey we can't find a location we were told to come back in a year and present kind of where we are and today we are presenting and in the packet I submitted presenting that we have been looking uh you know we have expended a lot of effort looking for a location and we can't find one the way the ordinance reads it hasn't been modified. It still requires us to find a location in the city of Steamboat. Um, so we're happy to expand our search to Route County if need be, but we're trying to comply with the ordinance as written, which is Steamboat proper. Uh, I don't know if that answers your question well, sir, but um I remember the discussion of Route County. Had the ordinance said Route County, I think we may be in compliance with the rule given what we source from there. I don't have those numbers, so I can't say definitively. uh but we are we are unable to comply if it's uh steambo proper.

So 15 months ago when you got a waiver you asked us to wave a a a rule of your license because you were not abiding that rule cuz your business decided to close these down for mold and whatever reasons. you're coming to us 15 months later asking us for another change in the code or waiver to the code. Did it ever appeal to you as a company that when you read the minutes and hear the tone and tenor of the council 15 months ago that maybe if we found something in Hayden or Oak Creek that would allow us to have a grow facility and follow the rule of engagement for a license. You could have asked for a waiver. You asked for a waiver 15 months ago. You're asking for one now. Why didn't you just help us and ask for that then?

Uh we we did ask last year that the council revisit the rule and the council agreed that they would consider it. We do not set the council's agenda. We have communicated. Fair enough.

Uh you know but sir I would disagree with the characterization that this was a business decision. Um as I mentioned our grow facility one of them was uh we got a notice of non-renewal from our landlord. That's not a decision we were able to make. And the other one, you know, I I don't I don't think it's reasonable to say we made a business decision not to spend more money than we have to remediate a growth facility that we don't know if we'll be in in 6 months. So, if you want to characterize it that way, I suppose that's you're right. But I don't think that's fair. I don't think that's a rational decision. Um, but again, we don't set the agenda. We are, you know, we are open to this board deliberating. This is the first we've heard that the board is going to discuss the rule itself in a couple months time. We'd certainly like to participate in that process. Um, but yeah, you guys, you guys granted the waiver last year because we had mold that caused us to not be able to grow. The the the issues that existed last year are exactly the same. We had mold that caused us to not be able to grow and we haven't been able to find a new location to do so despite our efforts. Okay, other questions anyone have?

I just want to clarify the time that they've not been in compliance has been since October 2023. That correct? We we had a waiver for all of 2025. So I'm just No, I mean factually speaking, you guys haven't sold 50% or more product sourced in Steamboat since when? October 2023. Since we lost our growth facilities in October. our last the last of our grow facilities in October 23. Thanks.

Yes, just just one question. Um so you could not resolve the the waiver issues within the past 15 months. If you got another waiver, what would that do? Um in terms of how would you um get back into compliance? Um because I' I've already stated we're going to revisit this and don't expect this to sunset in January. So that was that's been your statement. So um given that how do you expect to get into compliance?

It's a fair question. Um so there there are a few things there. Uh and I I think Madison will want to chime in as well, but uh first, you know, the ordinance as written says it will sunset. I understand this body can absolutely extend the same as this body can absolutely uh terminate the rule early if it wanted to. That was part of last year's discussion. That's up to this body to decide. We hope we'll be allowed to participate in that. Um, but we one, we would ask our competitors to sell us product at market rate. Uh, I think that would help us tremendously. Um, two, we will continue to exhaust our efforts to look for a location, though we can't magically create uh a viable zoning location. So, we may ask this body to consider opening up new zoning classifications for cultivation and extraction. And three, I think we would ask this body if it's inclined to renew or inclined to grant us a waiver uh today to expand the scope of our compliance efforts. So maybe it's all of route county and not just the city of Steamboat. And I think I can't say with any certainty that we will comply, but I'm certain we'll be much closer to compliance if uh you know surrounding areas are included in a waiver or in the future version of an or of the ordinance should it should it you know survive after January of next year. Uh Madison wanted to say one thing on that I believe but hope that helps sir.

Thanks Adav. Yeah just to answer the two previous questions briefly as well. um we would be in compliance if it was extended throughout Route County. There's a large manufacturer for distillate. To answer, I can't read everyone's names, but to answer the question about reporting, just to reiterate, the reporting ordinance has never been executed until our first request. So, still to this day, we're not clear or it's not clear if anyone has ever been in compliance prior to 2023 as far as we know. As for what we would do differently, yes, we would absolutely request that Route County was included in this, not only because there's additional spaces and opportunities, but there's more than two competitors that are available to to work with us. Um, there is one that is in Route County where we can absolutely move in. It's it's very common in the cannabis industry for co-acking facilities. So, we rent the space during a certain time from them or we can pay them a small fee to have them co-manufacture all of our products on our behalf to sell in our stores. In addition to that, a lot of those um starting material that distillate is being sourced across the state of Colorado. So, a handful of the top brands are purchasing from a company in route county which would make us beyond compliant.

Okay. Thank you. Um I had one question for you Mr. Ashner and that is you talk about you can't find a place um to grow your product um a facility and we granted you that waiver as we said 15 months ago and you put a email in in here into our packet from February of 25 saying that uh you were talking to Mr. uh Silas or uh Sees. Yes, Chris. And um he said there wasn't anything available. Then you put another memo in there a year later, February 2026, not even two months ago, asking the same question to Chris. If this was so important to you, why was a did a whole year go by and you didn't have any other correspondence around looking for a property?

Yeah, respectfully, sir. we, you know, I didn't want to overload um, you know, every correspondence and many of them were by phone. Uh, and so we had a an arrangement with Mr. Saias where he basically said um, and and Sherry can probably speak to this because it's her relationship, not mine, but my understanding is Mr. Saias said, "I'll look and if I find anything, I'll tell you." And so the the lack of routine communication with him isn't indicative of us not being on the lookout for a location. It's indicative of the fact that Mr. SC couldn't find a location uh and you know tell us, hey, this is available. Um I'm happy to try and get a statement from him to supplement the record. Uh but it's not just emails. Those aren't the only efforts we expended. You know, we Miss Marzerio called Mr. SAS as she testified to a few minutes ago. She was looking routinely on publicly available sources uh herself. it wasn't just outsourcing the efforts to Chris. Uh, you know, there were efforts expended. So, I I understand the city claims there's no evidence of any um efforts, you know, in between February and February. Uh, but that's not actually the case even though I understand the record maybe looks like that's the case.

Okay. Thank you. Does anyone have any other questions? If not, we will open it up to public comment. And um if there's anybody in the room who would like to make a public comment regarding this particular case, you have three minutes and you can come on down and tell us your name and address. And if there's anybody online who would like to make a public comment, please raise your hand. Come on down. Thank you very much. Um Charlie Petty, uh chief operating officer of Billow, uh 795 Conifer Circle. Um I just would like to address a couple things. Um premium pricing was said as a constricting factor of them not being able to be in compliance of this. Uh our pricing is consistent across the board across the entire state. I have a 100 plus retailers that exist in affluent communities, non-aff communities. Everybody pays the same pricing no matter what. Um, and we offer a ton of different products. So, we have all varieties of vaporizer cartridges, dabable concentrates, edibles, flour at multiple different pricing tiers. So, um, there is plenty of product available and I do have a surplus at all times. um to the point of the cash on delivery. Um the reason that we do that is because Tumbleweed has about 98,000 in past due according to the Cannabis Credit Association. So it's very difficult for us to offer terms to companies that do not consistently pay their bills on time. We use this Cannabis Credit Association to vet all of our customers, not just Tumbleeed. Um Billow has been in compliance with this rule since inception. We have submitted proof every single quarter of that. Uh we submitted it without being asked and

we've been submitting it after being asked. It's my opinion that it's not the job of the city to police this. It's the job of the lency to follow the rules and answer the questions and have proof when asked. Um, I also would like to address the fact that uh in page nine um they have a email stating that they are going to vacate uh 605 or I'm sorry 2 2835 Downhill Plaza unit 605. We actually took over that lease. We incurred mitigation costs. We operated that facility for 4 years. That facility had the ability to produce 200 lb every 3 months which is more than enough to supply the needs. So, it's kind of surprising to me that they would state that they were not able to find the facilities when they in fact actually had possession and operation of one that could very easily supply them. Uh, and they chose to vacate that premise. So, it's interesting to me the fact that they're stating that the whole entire thing seems more of ask for forgiveness instead of permission to me. And that bothers me a little bit just in the sense of being a good businessman and being an active member of this community and being acting in good faith in general. Um I believe that it's the duty of a business to do the best of their ability, follow the rules, be in compliance, and essentially just be good representatives of this community in general. So, thank you very much.

All right. Thank you. Is there anybody else in the room who would like to uh come on down and make public comment? Okay. Let me look online and and Dan, we have uh both uh Mr. Ashner and Emily Kelly both raising their hands. What is the protocol here regarding that? Well, once public comment is done, um you could allow Mr. Ashner an opportunity to respond, but I think you should complete the public comment before before we do that. Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to make a public comment? Well, Emily Kelly, she would be under the same or as Miss the applicant.

Emily, she's the uh she's the attorney for um Golden Leaf, not the applicant. Yeah. Okay. So, she would be fine. Yes. Okay. Um Emily, you're up. You have three minutes. Please state your name and address.

Hello again. My name is Emily Kelly, 235th Street. Uh again, representative of Golden Leaf. I've been their attorney since 2014. Thanks for taking the time to consider the issues today. Uh I've been going back and forth with the owners of Golden Leaf who are watching this as well. And there's just a couple things that we wanted to mention as a point of clarification. Uh contrary to the letter we previously submitted, Tumbleweed did in fact purchase a total of 30 pens for $720 over a year ago in March 2025. We wanted to extend our sincerest apologies for our forgetfulness, but that is the only product that Tumbleweed has ever purchased from Golden Leaf. Um, after going through our documentation in preparation for this hearing, it appears uh that it was quite difficult in terms of getting paid for that product and that was $720. And so as a result um I think that there might have been some trepidation in terms of selling additional product to Tumbleeed. Golden Leaf also has competitive pricing. Golden Leaf has had vertical integration since its inception and also self-regulates regardless of whether or not it's enforced. In October 2025, it looks like someone from Tumbleeed reached out to Golden Leaf and asked about product available during that time. We did in fact have a chiller go down. It worked. However, prior to that time, including January 2025, when their waiver went into effect, uh, until about October 2025, and it has been fixed as of months ago. Um, that being said, we are going over everything that has been said during this hearing. And other than that chiller and that brief moment, we've had no issues with supply. We offer competitive pricing not just for the higherend premium cannabis but for more affordable product and in all cander Golden Leaf and Billow have

figured out how to do the local sourcing and vertical integration. So it's clearly not impossible. Is it expensive? Yes. But that's what it costs to be a member of this community. Golden Leaf and Billow have made substantial investments in this community. We each employ a lot of people. We have a positive relationship. we can all have, you know, um, productive conversations with one another because at least over at Golden Leaf, we believe that a rising tide floats all boats, but you have to be a member of this community and that requires an investment. And so, Tumbleweed is looking for a complete and total waiver of local sourcing, but based on the last hearing in January, I guess we find it interesting that why not ask about route county as a whole? a total waiver seems uh like an unfair advantage given the state of the cannabis industry and where cannabis is in the city of Steamboat Springs, but why not even bring up Route County as a whole. We find that aspect um cause for pause. So that's all we have for tonight, but if anyone has any questions or wants further clarification, we are happy to provide that. Thanks for your time. Okay. Thank you, Emily. Um, Mr. Ashner, there's nobody else here on public comment, so I'm going to close public comment and I'll let you respond.

Thank you so much, um, chairman. Uh, very very briefly, I know we we've been here a while. Uh, in response to Mr. I'm sorry if I'm mispronouncing Petty Pey. Um, you know, I think Madison may be able to speak to this, but uh, one of the things that came across my desk from my client, you know, in the last couple of hours, um, was a an email from uh, Billow to a number of vendors a day or two after we purchased product at,300 a pound, offering a a extremely discounted um, the same product for an extreme discount and I haven't had time to get that prepared or submit to this council. I'm happy to, but uh Tumbleweed was conveniently not on the list of recipients uh who could have purchased at a discounted price. So, while they may sell to anyone and everyone at $1,300 a pound, they also offer discounts to everyone else. Um he also mentioned this location that can produce 200 pounds every quarter. Uh that was one of the locations that we did not abandon. An email that says we are vacating doesn't mean we voluntarily vacated. The landlord terminated that lease, told us he would not renew that lease. If he had renewed that lease, we very well may be in compliance. That's not a business decision uh or a voluntary decision of any kind that we made. Um, and so you know, the idea that uh an email and a docu said page nine, but I'm not sure which document that we said were vacating doesn't render the vacating voluntary, and I think that that warrants noting. Um, Miss Kelly uh stated, and first of all, very much appreciate um clarifying the record. Uh, didn't have to do that, but that was kind. Um, as of February of this year, we were told that they have no available product for wholesale and that they

would let us know when they do. Um, and that is I think exhibit nine uh and 10 in my packet. Um, that's that's a clear record. Uh, and you know, she she mentioned that Billow and Golden Leaf had it figured out. I think it bears noting one, the rule wasn't enforced uh until 23, but Tumbleweed also had it figured out. Tumbleeed was operating on all cylinders. They were doing well. They were cultivating and manufacturing most of what they sold at their stores in their facilities because their brands were on their shelves. Um, but mold and non-renewals were absolutely catastrophic to their ability to do so. Those are the reasons a waiver was granted last year and the conditions of the waiver required Tumbleeed to try and find a new location and try and source locally. I I hope I've shown that we have tried to do both of those things uh and that the market isn't supportive of our ability to comply despite our efforts. We hope that to the extent this council you know is inclined to um consider our waiver request that you know reasonable conditions can be imposed on it including expanding the territory to Route County in which case we think we will very quickly be able to come into compliance for the remainder of this year but we were not out of compliance last year because we were operating entirely under a waiver. Um so again thank you all. I know this is uh challenging but um so far has been a good discussion. We appreciate you uh taking into account everything we've shared with you today.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Let's deliberate.

Could I make one comment before you get into deliberations? Um and uh it does relate to uh generally the scope of the hearing tonight is for you to consider whether to grant the waiver and that relates to the the uh criteria that are in the code. Um I I did want to note um with particular reference to the letter that you received from Billow that that document addresses a number of issues and not just the waiver. Um, so I just uh I I'd like to focus on the waiver issues and to the extent that the bill of public comment or other public comment doesn't address this waiver issue, you shouldn't be considering that information. Okay. Thank you. All right. We'd like to go. So I'll start.

Yeah, if that's okay.

Yeah. Um so when we look at um the requirements um for in the code for cultivation it's really clear and if you own a business in steamboat it is your responsibility to understand the code and comply. um ordinances, whether you agree with them or not, those are essentially our law. And so, right now, we have code, we have an ordinance that's very clear on how folks need to operate um in the marijuana industry. I do want to highlight that uh Mr. Ashner said it's going to take at least six months once you even find a place. So, if you do the math, we're looking at another year. And to me, it just seems like they're hoping it's going to sunset. Um, regardless, um, we have an ordinance and our code is crystal clear on the requirements. So, I have nothing else to comment on this.

Thank you, Council Gary. Um, yes, thank you. I mean, I totally concur with you, Councelor Dixon. I mean in my notes as I was listening here is whether or not the rules are enforced right or that an incumbent it's incumbent upon a business to lawfully comply. So I think as you've stated it's it's pretty clear in terms of what the requirements have been and um you know they've not been in compliance since October 2023. Certainly, we did allow for the waiver during the last year, but again, I don't think we can depend they anyone can depend upon this decision about the rule suns setting and what council is going to do. That's not a foregone conclusion. That's certainly something that's up for discussion.

So, that's my opinion as well. Okay, good. Anyone else? I see this as a matter of fairness. Uh there is an added compliance cost that the other two businesses have had to bear and it's an added cost and expense. Tumbleweed has not had this added expense since October of 2023. So just as a matter of fairness, I don't think that granting this and it they've already received a year 15 months. Um and so I don't see any reason to grant this waiver again. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Agosa. I have I have nothing to add. I agree with what No. Okay.

And I don't have anything to add. I think what the points that were made um uh were spot on. So, with that, um I'll entertain a motion. Move to deny the tumble weed request for a waiver of the local production. the local production requirements set forth in section 12. Okay, thank you. Do we have a second? Okay, we have a motion by councelor Swinteek, second by councelor Aosta. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed.

Motion passes. 6. Thank you. Um it's 6:25. Um and I would like to take a motion if we could to adjourn from our or before we do that, we do need to approve the minutes from September 2nd, 2025. So, has anybody looked at those minutes? And are there any comments or questions? Or I'll entertain a motion to approve those? Move to approve. Second. Okay, we have a motion by councelor Gary, second by councelor Swintech to approve the minutes from September 2nd, 2025. All those in favor say I. I.

Opposed? Okay. Motion passes 6. And now I will entertain one final motion to adjurnn from our marijuana licensing authority meeting and go back to our regular city council work session. So moved. Second. Second. Okay. Motion by councelor Swinte, second by councelor Leino. All those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. We are back into our regular meeting and our work session. It's 6:25. We have two topics on the work session. We can either take a break now or in between the two topics. What would you prefer? Take a break, please. Yes, we'll take a 10-minute break. Thank you.

So with that in mind, I will turn it over to Chuck to talk about the fire department consolidation under fiscal sustainability. Success think we have success. Uh would you prefer that I stand at the podium or does it does it whatever whatever is comfortable for you. Sitting down might be a little more comfortable for me as long as I can I will stand up.

Um uh good evening council Chuck Sarasol your fire chief. Um we're here tonight to talk about uh kind of a highle overview of fire district consolidation. um what that what that what we mean by that, how that might look and the the challenges and benefits that um that consolidation may involve if we decide to move forward. So, um and I appreciate you taking the time uh to discuss this this evening. So, that's our purpose really just what I what I just stated. So, the consolidation of the city of Steamboat Springs um fire department into the Steamboat Springs area fire protection district. And I will get into some definitions of that as we move on. This topic does align with a couple strategic objectives um as well as one of the community plan key initiatives that I won't read for you. So after this evening or after this discussion um the couple questions we'll ask is is is council interested in further investigating it? Um I do not plan to get too into the weeds and into too many details of what it would entail. um just kind of that high level um overview. So council's direction would then um send us off to to say well if if you are interested um is then the fire oversight committee which involves two council members and two district board members uh the team to at least start taking the lead on that and diving into that topic. Um so let's talk about a little bit of what what the problem is I guess and why we're even uh talking about this today. One of the first things I'll just state kind of right off the bat is as fire chief I I really report to two policy groups. One being city council of course for the city and then the other one being the fire district board. Um and I believe my task as fire chief is to to keep our community as safe as possible through fire services. Um I do believe

and this topic has has been been lingering for many many years. Um I do believe as well as the pri previous chiefs to me um as well as some city managers that you've heard on is that ultimately um fire district consolidation really would best serve um the community that we currently serve with the Steamboat Springs Fire Department and that is city of the 10 square miles plus the 380 square miles that involves the fire district. So, what's going on um is we've looked back um you know, we we keep talking about increasing level of service and I I want to discuss that for a little bit because what we're anticipating is continued increase and continued uh costs to serve uh our community with fire service. So, looking back over 20 years um just at call volume, what we know is that call volume es and flows. Sometimes it goes up high, sometimes it drops down. But when you look at that trend line over the last 20 years, we have an increase of 4% annual call volume every year. So every year we increase by about 4% um on average. So um on a lot of our projections and our strategic planning, we utilize that as a target point. When do we hit capacity of our current staffing? When do we hit capacity of our current stations? When do we hit a service level that we deem isn't appropriate anymore for the community? Um the next uh number we look at a lot is called concurrent call volume. Um and that's when multiple calls are happening at the same time. That being a smaller number in has been increasing larger um about 5.62% over the last 15 years. And 15 years is the just the number we had good data back to. Um and right now last year like that concurrent call volume number is 754. To add a little context to that though, um the city has been and the fire district have been doing a great job I believe in continuing to increase our ability to serve the public. So currently we have

two fire stations that are sta each staffed with an ambulance and an engine. So for a lot of our basic calls um we can handle two calls at the same time. However, I do want to mention that anything larger than a basic kind of medical call or fire alarm, a structure fire, a wildland fire, a hazmat incident, multi-vehicle accident, that actually takes all of our crew. So, all 10 people to go to that call. And in those situ situations, the second call out does not get the adequate response we would like. But so if we then take assume that those are getting covered and let's just look at third calls out and above because third calls we can confidently say we both of our crews are busy um we cannot respond to that third call out as like as well as we would like. And what that means is that we're typically reaching out either to our folks that are at home and saying, "Hey, please could you come in and help us out if you're available or we're reaching to our mutual aid departments um around the county." Um, and we know that on a on in the best case scenario, it's going to take them at least 20 minutes to get into Steamboat. Um, but more likely 30 minutes or so. So, our concern is third call out and higher. those are averaging about 133 calls a year. And when we look at numbers of sort of critical point, we we call those overflow calls. Um we really are saying by the time we've hit 200, we need to have already acted on whether it's additional staffing and or a station at that point. Um for context, 200 third call out a year are about four week. Um where you know compounding this is that we're we're really an island here in Steamboat and Route County as compared to a lot of areas. We don't have the Eagle Valley situation where you have 11 fire departments that can all help cover each other and kind of

move their resources around. We're really in a an an island here where our surrounding fire districts are actually also struggling. um themselves. They're losing a lot of their volunteers. Um and every time we ask them to cover our area, which we do quite a bit. Um then they're saying, "Okay, are we okay with leaving our town uncovered?" Um so that's becoming more and more of an issue as we move forward. Um so those are some of the challenges that we're looking at as where out where we're growing and how we're going to have to address those. Um, the other thing that I would say that we'd like to be addressing a little bit better than we are doing today is our wildfire situation. Now, I don't want to um imply that we're not doing and we haven't been doing a lot of good things. We've increased our wildfire seasonal staffing and in this year um we actually were just uh talking about bringing on two more for this season as we're we're facing some unprecedented situations. So, we have been doing a good job. But if I had a magic wand and said, "Where would I like to be today?" If I had that wand to say, "Give me the money and the resources," we would be in a different spot. We would be we would have um even more local resources that we'd bringing on seasonally. Um, we likely would have, and this is in our strategic plan, we'd have at least one year round uh individual that was focused on planning for wildfire season, planning mitigation projects, planning public education events to get the public aware of what's happening and get us better situated. Um, that would also come with increased per um equipment apparatus, potentially some equipment that would work on on fuels mitigation like a masticator. we'd we'd have a we'd be working a little bit more with the wildfire council and supporting them um in a in a better way. We don't monetarily support the the wildfire council. Um but we would be using them uh for public education as

well as as pushing this that out ourselves. Um and then there's still plenty of funding and grant opportunities out there um that we really need people that are working year round to uh to be pushing for that. All of that um costs money. So, uh, what's the challenge for the city? Um, how do we pay for that? How do we continue to pay for the fire service that we're talking about here? So, with all those increased threats, um, the the the last published strategic plan was in 2023. It's being updated this year. Um but that in that plan we have a spreadsheet that looks six years ahead of and estimates if if the strategic plan were implemented which I understand it's not always implemented every aspect of it but that would anticipate a 12.6 million budget by 2029. So for context our current budget is at about $8.6 million. So, we'd be looking for $4 million in three years to s to to fully implement that strategic plan and meet our needs. Um, that's just an operating cost. When you look at capital costs um for our strategic plan and what we submit for the CIP, between 27 and 34, we're we have $9.1 million in capital equipment. That's just apparatus and large equipment like life pack monitors and and ambulance gurnies. Um, so then when we look at the actual stations that are on the horizon, um, you can see the numbers that we're talking about there. Um, and that doesn't contemplate the additional personnel that would come with a westside station. Um, so what's what's the challenge we're see faced? Well, the city um, obviously is is is talking fiscal sustainability outside of just this conversation um, about meeting our needs all across the board for the for all departments to meet service levels. So, um, so that means we're we're we're struggling,

right? And and the fire department and we all understand that, um, in order to keep all departments afloat, we all have to make sacrifices and work together to do that. Um, so, as I mentioned, we're we're we're not quite where we'd like to be with wildland fire, uh, our wild fire program. Um and so right now the currently the the city is currently funding the fire department at the tune of about $4.1 million out of the general fund. So out of primarily sales tax. The rest of the funding for the fire department comes from a 2 mill property tax that I'll talk a little bit about um farther down uh to the tune of of a little over $2 million that's being generated for that. Um we still have some wi some wiggle room in there, but we've been using um available funds from that to pay for some of the capital equipment we've been purchasing over the last few years. We anticipate that that two mills will be pretty much fully utilized by operational um costs in the next couple of years um particularly if we continue to to grow um as we we have in the strategic plan. So obviously the municipal environment provides competing budget interests throughout the the different departments and and everything that you guys think about. And fortunately you don't have to think about fire too too often. I'm not here very often for you. Um that 2 mill solution um will likely need to be augmented one way or the other. Whether we're talking about the city um and how the city might do it or potentially in this consolidation discussion that we have going on. Um, so what exactly are we talking about when we say fire consolidation? So, um, in this case, I want to be clear. I'm not talking about a fire authority. I'm not talking about relooking at the IG in the current situation. What we're talking about is um is what we had contemplated back in 2018 when there was

no mill levy in place. um and that is to annex the city residents and the city 10 square miles into the Steamboat Springs area fire protection district's boundaries. And so therefore they would have the entire area including the city in their fire district. Um so that would result in one fire district with one dedicated funding source and one governing body overseeing the fire department. Um so that that's what we're that when we talk about the things that I'm I'm mentioning as benefits and challenges that's the the consolidation we're talking about. So what it would result in is a single governance fire district model. So it would have one policy one district board. Now the board would be just like you folks. They'd be elected officials um by the citizens within their district to represent the fire district. Um, back in 2024, um, a a bill was passed, uh, in Colorado, um, that opened up and changed the situation a little bit differently for, um, fire districts than when we first were talking about this in 2018. Of course, there's still the potential for mill levies for a fire district. But that bill also added the potential that a fire district could um go to the voters and ask for a little bit of sales tax if they felt that was um an avenue they wanted to try to pursue or um there's also the addition of impact fees. Prior to this bill, fire districts had to get approval from the county in order to implement impact fees. This bill actually now allows fire district boards to implement impact fees without that approval. So a little bit e easier process um for the fire district boards. Um this model it would sort of more directly align the revenue stream to the service that is being provided. So what I mean by that is if you're primarily funded by property tax um you are funding a service that is protecting

life and property directly. And so there's there's a little bit more alignment there um than doing it through uh primarily sales tax which we're doing through the the general fund. Um a little bit more uh transparency um in regards to it's very clear how much is being collected for the fire service. It's going to the fire service uh board and it's being distributed for fire service. So it's very easy to track um what's coming in and where that money is going in this in this model. Um and then of course the other uh difference here is that you have a single focused fire uh board. All they do is worry about how the fire service is provided to the community. I understand and and appreciate the the job you folks are doing, but you have a lot to consider in your work um regarding the all of the operations for the city. Um and that makes it challenging. Um the other aspect I would say is that our departments also have a lot that they're thinking about. our internal departments like finance and IT and HR um they have to consider everybody in the city and the fire service is really a bit of a unicorn in that situation. We have different um scheduling rules. We have different FLSA laws that apply to us. We have different hiring practices and training and so that has created a lot of extra time for our internal services to help figure out how to handle fire department services within the city. Um, as I mentioned, there's a potential for a 4.1 million of general fund to be allocated um, differently in this case and then the impact fee and a little bit of a flexible budget management. I see my time ticking down. Are you okay if I go for a few more minutes? Yes,

I think I only have a few more minutes. Um, so some of the challenges we'll see is one of the big ones that I'll say is quite um quite apparent is that you would lose control of the fire service for the city of Steamboat Springs. And by that I just mean that you would not be governing and and um uh hiring and doing the the oversight of the fire department for the city. The body that would be doing that would be an elected body for the district. Um there would be some transition requirements. Obviously, we'd have to dive in and figure out how uh personnel and benefits and all that would transfer to the fire district. Um there would need to be ballot um public education and ballot measure considerations. Um and then making sure we're we're um the district and the city are aligned financially on how this would look how it would look on a on a ballot and that we're all in the same place. And one of the big concerns from your point of view, I would imagine, is making sure that the citizens feel they're going to get the same fire service um after this is all done. So that's the community perception and expectation. um resource equity I mentioned and then really it would be transferring um a large portion of what is now sales tax into a property tax focused revenue stream for the fire service. This is just another kind of quick pros and cons lists um that I'm not going to read individually. So, um, the initiative that we're we've been discussing and talking about really again would be my understanding and working with our, uh, discussing with our legal folks is that it would be a an election that would be sponsored by the fire district and they would be asking the city residents if they're willing to join into the fire district. Um, that would then, in my opinion, create a partnership between the fire district and the city to say, "Okay, now how do we get this done?" um making sure as I mentioned that we're aligned on what we think the funding should be um as well as as working to get the bill the election passed um so

sharing in some of the education and and um elections. Now, one of the things um that uh is worth noting is on the surface um if if all they the district did was ask the city voters if they wanted to join into the fire district and left it there, all the district all the city voters would be going from a 2 mill property tax currently paid to the city to 9.24 mills that the district currently collects. Um, I say that and we do have members of the district board here tonight that can answer some questions, but one of the things we know is that the majority of valuation in our community and in our certainly in our fire district is in the city of Steamboat Springs. So, one of the things we've talked about that we the the oversight committee would dive into is what exactly is the appropriate level of number of mills that we would need to be make sure we're funded for the future and well funded as we move forward. And everybody um you know at least is open to consideration that that 9.24 mills might be too much. um we might be able to to bring that down a little bit in conjunction with impact fees and and other options. You know, is there a different picture so that city residents wouldn't be faced with such a large jump in mill levies? Um but that's that's really what I envision the uh the next steps would be is really digging into that. Um as I mentioned, all all the revenue from the elect, you know, if this was to pass, the revenue then would all go to the fire district. The other thing I want to note is um not only is would it be a fire district election um we do sort of have a um an advocy advocacy group which some members are here today as well to answer questions with our local firefighters union. I think that's important to note in the sense that I do know oftentimes when elections are kind of brought up um we're wondering well who's going to really support and get this information

out there when we have to all be quiet and back off. um the local union as well as the state that you know they're part of the state firefighters union and international union. This is not new territory for those organizations. They have playbooks that can help communities get these type of elections passed. Um and they have thrown in their hat and saying of course they they would advocate for this as well. So, just to wrap up, the questions really uh are um do you have any further questions and then um would you be willing to consider diving further into this? And is the oversight committee the way to go? Okay. Thank you, Chuck.

Yeah. Before we uh see if there's any questions, I did just want to uh acknowledge all of you people, firefighters, uh district board folks, and also our police officer over there in the right hand corner. Thank you all for your service. Um we really appreciate what what you all do. So, thank you. Okay, so do we have questions for Chuck?

You know, I just let me start off with just one um question. Chuck, give me um how many cities in the state of Colorado that you know are set up like us where we they own the they have their own fire department versus this the district. So, um the uh and I I anticipated that question and I had it written down. It's there's about 340 some odd fire departments in the state of Colorado and 260 of them are districts. So roughly 60 to 80 are either municipalities or some other combination.

And are those smaller cities or they like a aurora? Um it's a little it's a mix of both. I can give you some like Denver actually is a um is a city-run department very Glenwood Springs. Glennwood Springs is similar in our setup that we have today. They're a city department with an IGA with their district. Okay.

So there there's the by far the majority of fire departments are fire districts. And what we're seeing is that um a lot of our situations are actually moving towards fire districts. Summit um fire just went to a a consolidated district. Um the Roaring Fork Valley just went into a consolidated district. So um it's a pretty common theme at this point. And then the second question that I have is that back in 2018 17 you had this discussion. Why didn't you go to consolidation then? Um well a different political environment I'd say and yeah we can uh I'm looking over here at these and and I'm happy

this right Donna and you guys were part of this discussion back then you can come to the table. Part of what we were seeing at that point was um there it would have been a 0 to9 mil increase. Um the Gallagher amendment um was in full play which meant really the commercial property owners were going to pay about four times more than residential property owners. Um and there wasn't the option of those other things that I just mentioned that were passed in the 2024 bill. And so um quite honestly a lot of the commercial property owners were very concerned about the increase from 0 to 9 mills and the effect on their taxes um and they they came out u vocally. Interesting. Thank you.

Other questions.

Um not to be flipped but what is the experience of somebody who's one of those 133rd calls? Like are they standing there watching their house on fire for 30 minutes? Uh it so it depends, right? Of course. But um I I'll say most commonly what that means is that instead of a um instead of us leaving our station and driving to that wherever that location is, so we have a pretty big district. So that could be literally 2 minutes or it could be 40 minutes. But instead of uh the time frame being drive time, they are now waiting for an ambulance from a a surrounding district to drive to Steamboat and then and then address their call. So if it's a medical call, um they could be waiting 40 minutes longer, 30 minutes longer. Um and oftentimes what we don't know, for instance, um West Route has two people that are on 24/7, so they might be able to respond in just an ambulance. Um, one of the reasons, and not to get into the operations of it, but oftentimes two people in an ambulance isn't really an adequate number of people to handle a call, especially a serious call. If it's anything else, um, like if we're out on two calls and a car accident comes in, um, then, uh, then we're asking West Route and Oak Creek maybe to come and help. Um we're trying to figure out how we we scramble to make sure to see if we have anyone that can break free from one of the calls we're currently on. Um so that might result in less service for that call as well. So it's it's really a juggling act for our officers to try to figure out how to best suit those calls.

So it could look like having a medical emergency and sitting at home for 30 minutes waiting. Yes. More than likely the third call is an out. More than likely that's what how it results. Okay. Thanks. And that's where when when we when I say, you know, we have we have between 133 and 200 until we've really hit that maximum. That's that's sort of a risk tolerance guess, right? And um that's up to us, but uh but that's that's where we feel, you know, we need to have action take place.

I wanted to layer on just follow up on that question quickly. Um and it's really around two things that I think we're kind of falling behind the curve here on. one is the concurrent calls and all the potential issues associated with that and the other is the wildfire program and given the situation we're in this year and how that seems to be accelerating o over time. Um would it be fair to say that if we had the consolidation that we could meet those challenges quicker, faster, more effectively? So, I think that would be fair to say as long as we move forward looking at what we believe our funding needs are in the future and we set ourselves up properly to grow in the future, right? We could and I hope that's what we would do. I I know we have a lot of smart people in the right places to make that happen. But um but that would be the the only caveat is right if we didn't if we didn't ask for enough mills or make the right combination of funding so that in three years we find ourselves how do we fund you know where we need to be. Um, so we've been doing strategic planning for many years now in order to try to really look six years ahead and say this is where we think based off of the the average call volume growth, the increase in concurrent calls, this is what we think we'll need. So we can we have a good idea of what that funding will look like in four or five years. So then the next question is can we can we get it passed? So, if you have the right strategy and whatnot, it seems to me that there's more of a sense of urgency now than there's ever been.

I mean, based off of what I've, you know, the wildfire alone is is a concerning obviously concerning situation, and I I by no means want to again belittle the the work that we've been putting into addressing that. Um, we've come a long way from where we were. Um, and we'll we will always do our best. Um, but um, yeah, I would, like I said, there are some communities we can look at and say, I really wish we were kind of a little bit closer to that. Other C questions? Yeah. Where'd the baby go? First of all, I don't know. Hey, I think I may have scared him when I Babies are welcome. Always.

Yes. Um, so, um, question. And so I'm hearing a lot about funding and I agree. Mhm. Why um what's the difference of if the city was to go out and put something on the ballot for a property tax to fund city services versus um consolidation?

Well, um so I guess it depends on what the city and how they would ask. So, the way the city went for the ballot measure in 2019 was that that ballot measure was focused on fire and specifically funded for the fire department. Um, so if the city decided to do that, um, then we would have a similar bump to what we had in 2019 and we could we could anticipate what that funding would be. Um, I would say the the big difference there between consolidation though is it is still a city election. the funds are still coming into the city. And even in 2019 when that did pass, a lot of the comments we were hearing was, well, the city's just going to play the shell game with the money. They're going to bring it in and then they're going to, you know, drop how much they're funding out of it from the general fund. And so I I think one of the primary differences um to speak candidly is a little bit of trust in the city as opposed to one policy board that the the spending and the revenue is very transparent of where it where it's coming from and where it's going.

Got it. Yeah. And I I I don't disagree with what you're um putting in front of us tonight. I was just thinking about questions we might get as to well why don't we just put something on the ballot for a property tax to help fund you all um more um but it sounds like it's more um to it than just funding um there's greater leverage with having a um being part of the fire district

right I also would like to say that um as you saw in in Chuck's um future growth with the with the the budget going up to 12 million. If for some reason the consolidation didn't pass or we decided not to move forward with it, it is very likely and highly likely that we will be going to the voters and asking for probably four or five mills just to fund the future growth. So either way, I think the city residents are going to be paying more for future fire services than they are now by quite a bit.

May actually I want to follow up because that is the exact same question I was I was going to ask. Um, but I was going to ask in a different way because essentially, yes, there's a level of service that that our community does expect. And so the, you know, the question in my mind is if nothing changed, what would we need to ask the community for to support the services that they that we know that they expect out of our fire service. So there is there was that number of nothing if nothing changed. And then there's the other number of okay if it went to um in into consolidated uh you know fire service what would that cost the community and then so the question is more about if we said yes today and wished you forward how long will it take you to run those numbers to figure out those two kind of scenarios because that's you know for in terms of fiscal responsibility that's what this is driving this being driving this that's a key number for, you know, for us and and the entire community.

And I've actually um I I would as as always numbers need to be updated fairly regularly. Um but over the last couple years I have presented our oversight committee with numbers on uh what our first of all what our strategic plan would cost in the six years that it looks forward um and what we would estimate as mill levy revenue uh scenario. So whether it's five mills, six mills, a little bit of maybe a half percent sales tax that was mixed in there and impact fees. And so we we do have the the the tools in place to just continue to tweak those numbers and and dive in and and so if we are directed to move forward with that, that would be um you know, those would certainly be starting points that we'd start plugging in the most recent numbers.

Yes. Um thank you. Just a couple of quick questions for you. one in terms of the legislation passed in 2024 that allows for the imposition of an impact fee. Is that authority just for fire districts or is that also allowed for a municipality? I believe it's just fire districts. A municipality can do it now.

Okay. But it and but see now I think one of the so one of the main things about implementing an impact fee is you have to have a nexus study, right? And um and I think some of the challenges over the years and and Dan can jump in on this is that for municipalities if you're doing it for uh additional services that nexus study becomes a little bit more challenging. Um fire services are is a pretty easy nexus to impact fees.

Okay. And then secondly, to the extent that you're looking at um coming up with or asking for kind of authority to move forward on a consolidation plan. So we say yes, how long will something like that take? I mean, in terms of and and actually getting to the point of having it in place to the extent that you obviously have to take some something to the voters. Sounds like you have to set up a governance board, right? So can you walk us through?

So a couple things that we have going for us is there is a governance board already in place um with the district board. there are already um elected officials for their district. Um and we already actually have the fire department in place. We're not taking two separate fire departments and and consolidating them and say how do we get Silverthorn Fire to now work with Frisco Fire or something like that. We're already operationally one department. Um, so what we our discussions have been um both in the oversight committee and and with the city management is that we we think um the best target would be an election in November of 27. And so what that would mean is that we'd we'd still have to while it seems far away, we'd still have to jump right on it. Um start talking about what is exactly does this look like? What are the funding models? How do we say our messaging? I believe there would we'd probably hire someone for some polling services. we'd probably want to look at hiring someone for that messaging to help us get that message across. Um, and then be ready to put in um ballot language by I think Dan was saying by next August or or so would be the roughly the time frame there.

So I mean I guess what I'm hearing you say then really I mean it's kind it would be two questions, right? one I mean in terms of getting approval of allowing or including steamboat in the existing fire district and then two the funding mechanism.

So I think and this is where our legal minds would get together but I I believe the first question would be are the city residents willing to be annexed into the district? That would presume that they're going to be annexed in at 9.24 mills. So then the question that I don't I don't have the best answer for and we were kind of going back around with is if the decision though was to say that well we we actually think seven mills is enough how exactly the district would would take that to the vote. I don't know that it would be a need to be a vote but they would have to to to take bring that to their electorate and say hey we're actually going to lower your taxes.

It may be just the language right? Does it say 9.4? Does it say up to you know right in terms of what kind of discretion there is? No, there wouldn't be a tab election to impose another tax. The election in the city would just be to

sorry um there wouldn't be a tab election. Um the tax would just be imposed by the annexation. So, you know, if the if the plan is to reduce the tax rate, um the board doesn't need to have an election to do that. The board can just say we're going to, you know, we're not going to impose nine mills. impose seven or five or four and a half or whatever the number is. Um it gets a little more complicated if it is desirable from a political perspective to tie the board's hands i.e. reduce its authority. Um in that case maybe you do have to have an election and how to coordinate an election of the citizens in the existing board um is that's a little complicated. Yeah.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Those are the things that we would dive into here in the the next few months. Okay. There any other questions, council? Uh yeah, I think this is a quick question. Um do you have any examples of of um how the fire other fire services have used impact fees because I know that you know for this community uh I think they want people to pay for growth and so I I think that would be an attractive you know way of raising revenue versus over a mill levy.

Yeah. Um, so there were a few examples of fire districts that had implemented impact fees prior to this 24 law once this 24 law was passed um that they've been coming out of the woodwork including Oak Creek Fire and I believe Wester Fire just um implemented that as well. The Nexus studies and the way they're doing it is um there there's a few different methods out there but there are plenty of examples to look at. typically um like kind of a flat rate for um for residential and then square footage for commercial type of properties. Okay, no more questions.

Montine, I just have one question that I I haven't asked Chuck. Um you mentioned that to proceed there's likely to be some consultant cost consultants for polling and and um have we have we looked at what that would cost either the city or the district to move forward with this and where we haven't yet at this so it's likely that would become backing for some sort of funding request from the city council to fund sort of this next effort. Yeah, I would think so. And and again, that's where I um you know, the the oversight committee has been working well together and I would imagine that they'd come up with some some a plan of action and a proposal that they would be both bringing back to their boards is the way I would envision that. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Chuck.

Now, we'll open it up to public comment. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to come up and make a public comment? You have three minutes. you'd state your name and address. Chuck, can you actually stop the sharing of your screen so that we can get I apologize. I lost my baby support team, but I'm going to power through. Uh my name is Brian McGovern. I'm actually a resident in the district, but I'm the president of the Steamote Springs Professional Firefighters. I represent the professional firefighters who serve this community every day. I'm here tonight to express our support of fire service consolidation. We believe that consolidation is an important step towards strengthening fire and EMS services to the residents of Steam Springs and the surrounding area. Our community continues to grow, particularly with the expansion of urban housing projects and increased residential density as the development evolves. It is important that fire and emergency services are positioned to effectively plan for these changes and provide consistent reliable protection. A consolidated fire service allows for unified planning and a coordinated approach that enhances the safety of the firefighters and improves the service levels that we can provide to the community. Along with our local support, we bring the support of the Colorado Professional Firefighters Association and the International Association of Firefighters. And as Chief Sarasulli pointed out, these entities kind of bring many layers of support, not only financially, but they live through this on a day-to-day basis. They have teams.

I had a meeting with one of the teams yesterday and we talked about the strategic planning of something like this going towards a consolidation of the services. They also bring the financial help too as as Mr. Leon was explaining there could be some financial aspects. the CPF, which is the Colorado Professional Firefighters, they have avenues for grants for the locals, such as us that we can access for just this. The the local group also has a spec a specific political account that we as the members have put towards that we can put into play for this situation as well. As you move forward with the discussion on consolidation, we believe that this is the appropriate direction for fire and EMS services in Steamboat Springs and the Steamboat Springs Area Fire Protection District. Thank you.

Thank you, Brian. Is there anybody else who'd like to make public comment in the audience? Come on down.

This You guys just can't get rid of me. Who is this? I don't know your name.

It feels like I've been here some some time before. Um I'm not going to waste a lot of time here, but a little bit of history because I go back a a fair ways with with this whole issue starting with the fire EMS funding committee of which I was a happy member. Um, we spent a lot of time trying to figure out what kind of mill levy we could actually recommend back to council based upon the obvious problem between residential rates and commercial rates. And we came we ended up with that 2 mil levy. We knew at the time that that wasn't close to enough to adequately fund this fire department, but it was the rate that we had guessed hoped would would pass. Um to to my surprise, it did. To to my great surprise, it did with a with a very large percentage. I honestly don't remember what it was. I want to say 60 65% Tom, I don't know if you remember. People support the fire department. That makes it an easier ask than almost anything else you might come up with in terms of attacks. Um, so that's that's the good part of it. The hard part is not asking for enough. The hard part now is with what we have coming and this is the first time I have seen our fire chief come up here and tell the council we really

don't have enough money to need to to do what needs to be done going forward. Uh that's that's to me that's that's pretty shocking to hear because that's not that's not how the fire department in this community has presented itself. It has always been. We will make whatever you all lot to us work. And what we're hearing now is different. And I hope you're all paying attention to that. Um, and that I think is about all I want to say except well, one more thing. When you go and ask the public for a a consolidated fire department, you are getting rid of the other big problem that we had all those years ago, which is the total distrust in city council's ability to properly manage funding. Now, I don't happen to believe that's true. I can't I can't think why I wouldn't agree with it. But that is still out there. That is still a mentality in this city. City council just wastes money. They don't know how to spend money. The city doesn't know how to make a budget. And without answering that, if you can avoid that by talking about a consolidated fire district, you're going to make the the battle easier. Uh that's that's about it. Uh I'm kind of for this.

Thanks. Thank you, Joela. Okay. Is there anyone else in the audience who'd like to come up and make a public comment? Okay, seeing none, and I will look online. Is there anybody online? If you'd like to make a public comment, please raise your hand. Okay, seeing none, we will close. Randall, you want to come up? Don't be shy. Last but not least, there's an obligation.

Randle Hanway, the president of the fire district. Um, I was just going to add a couple things. Um, back in '98 is when we built the Grand Hotel, uh, the hospital and redid the high school. Those projects combined were about, um, just under 200 million. The grand was 80 million. What's on the books right now for the next four years is about 1.5 billion in new construction. And the delta between where we were then and how far we've come and how much we're going to grow in the next 5 to seven years, I it's compounded numerous times. Um on the call out I was going to bring up to Councilman Swit. Um it's probably been 5 years ago, but we had a local who came in and talked to council about just this. He was 18 seconds. He was the second call and he had a heart attack on House and Hill. The third call came in 18 seconds later. If they had responded to the third call first, he wouldn't have made it. So it's it's getting to be a real issue. And um we don't we're open as the district. Uh we were a little hurt last time. We spent a lot of money to drive down that road. I think $70,000. So we only want to do it if the city is all in. And and the problem is you don't really know if you're all in until you go through the process and figure out if it's doable. Like we don't I wish we could say, "Yeah, we can do it for six or seven mills and we could lower the county and raise the city or we don't know what that would look like. It would take some people to really dig into the finances and see what the best instruments are for implementing that, but um just know that we're supportive. We think it's inevitable. That's the reason why everybody else is you're starting to see this happen more and more commonly. And fortunately, we have a

he's a great attorney in terms of districts. I think he manages about 65 of the districts in Colorado. So, he's extremely knowledgeable about helping us kind of put that together and what it would look like and how to do it because we certainly aren't aware of it. And one thing I will bring up and um hopefully I'm wrong, but Chuck brought a bunch of people up last fall and we met and we learned all about these consolidation and authorities and almost to a person, every person said, "However long you think it'll take, it'll take two or three times longer than you think." Most of the people I think it took them between six and eight years. So, I I would hope that we could do much better than that, but I I think we'll be forced to. So, hope that helps.

Thank you, Randall. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else want to last call for public comment? Okay. See none in the room and seeing no hands raised online, we will close public comment. Bring it back to council to discuss the two questions for tonight. Um, and I don't we don't have them up on the You want to put them up there, Chuck? But the first one was, would the council like to further explore fire department consolidation? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I think we're unanimous on yes. Is that Is that a definitive enough answer?

I think I got You got that? Okay. And the second question, if yes, is the fire oversight committee the best fit to take the lead? Yes. Yes. Yes. Let me write that down. Doesn't quite happen like that all the time. Appreciative. But thank you and um good luck on moving forward on this.

Looking forward to help whatever we can do to help you out. you know, we clearly, you know, getting out to the public and that's something that as a leader and a council moving forward to expedite what Randall said about six to eight years, how can we as a council lead our community into understanding some of this, you know, not just the newspaper and PIO's um or as what what could we do? And so, I don't know the answer to that. It's just more like um give us the information more than at the time of decision making that could help us get this to the community better. As you're going and as the oversight is talking to other communities and how they've done this

and orchestrated a consolidation, what do they wish you did instead? Start asking that question. Bring that information back to us. Make that part of your strategy that we would like to help out with. At least I would. I will chime in though. What we can do is stand unanimously, the seven of us behind a mill levy if we are going to pursue this. Amen. And we don't individually splinter off when the pressure increases. Thank you. Good point. Yes. Thank you. Well put. All right. Thank you, Chuck. We're going to be seeing you in about another five seconds, so don't go too far.

Yeah. Thank you everyone from the fire department and the district board. Thank you for being here. Thanks for your service and thanks for your work. Okay, our second work session topic is the city of Steamboat Springs emergency operations plan. Chuck,

you're on again. I'm back. And I think my techn is working. Okay. Um hopefully this one will be a little bit lighter um discussion uh really for for this topic. Uh I'm really here we do have a few questions and some guidance that we'd like from you um after this conversation, but primarily this is going to be informative as to um to what the emergency operation plan is, where it came from, and and what uh council's role would be in that as well. And so um so tonight we're going to talk about what an emergency operation plan is. Um and it really creates a framework that guides how the city prepares for prepares for and responds to and recovers from emergencies and large incidents disasters. Um really this falls under a couple of strategic plan outcome areas of um certainly safe community and high performance government. So the questions we'll revisit it um at the end are certainly any questions that you might have about the plan um how we're going to proceed for it. One of the things I will say is this is a draft plan right now. Um there are a few things we're going to ask from you and a few other things that still need to be completed for the plan. Um but I do anticipate that by mid mid year June July um will be coming back uh for potential adoption of the plan. Um and then it will be a moving plan, a forever growing plan that we always are revisiting, changing, updating um as we um experience things and move forward. um what kind of training might uh council be interested in uh uh in regards to your role um in responding to disasters as well as in this plan? Um

and then we have a couple of specific um guidance questions. One is regarding uh emergency spending authority and some of the things that um we've discussed with the finance director and the city manager as far as and and legal about uh moving forward with that. and then a little bit of direction on continuity of government and and how we'll take the next steps. So, um why did we come up why why did we feel the emergency operation plan um mattered? Um obviously emergencies occur with little warning. Um so therefore preparation is key. Um, and one thing I will say is that a few years ago, um, the city manager at the time had come to, uh, leadership one day and said, um, he I I'd reached out and I'd asked for our emergency plan. And he kind of presented all of us with what that emergency plan was. And what it really looked like more was u individual departments um, thinking about what they would do in an emergency and not um, as much of a cohesive plan. And so city manager um Tom Leon really when we discussed this when he came on board as city manager um recognized that that really wasn't a plan um and that we wanted to move forward with a a cohesive framework on how we would address that. So that's really where this was born from. Um and we looked at other communities some of the other options and opportunities um that were available to us and felt this was the best way for the city to move forward. So obviously large incidents can overwhelm us pretty quickly es particularly if we're not prepared for it. Um and and they may quickly move into multi-jurisdictional um situations even though the incident might still be primarily within Steamboat Springs. So an an EOP um as we'll refer to ensures those that list of items really what's everybody's role um organizing a unified command structure making sure we're using our resources and other resources efficiently how we continue in

situations where maybe um council can't convene to make uh um emergency ordinances and that sort of thing. Um and then how do we recover better on the on the the the tail end of emergencies. So what's in the EOP? um assuming you all at least glance through it. Um we talk about identifying hazards. The county um undergoes and re re-evaluates a hazard mitigation plan every year. That's referenced in this. We weren't going to reinvent the the study on what those hazards are and they're no surprise to us. Um wildfire is one of our biggest hazards. Um we also have flooding risks, severe weathers on that list. But then there's also some man-made hazards that we need to think about as well. um technological um terrorism, right? IT um incidents, hazardous materials, spills, um that sort of things that also um might generate um an emergency. One of the other things uh that I like to bring up a lot is even a a water main break um would be something that would activate this team to some degree to help our city make sure that people are notified if people aren't able to drink water or uh how we will supply them with with water or whatever it might be. So even incidents at that scale are what we are imagining with this plan. We identify critical facilities and really the main point of that is is a good reference for us to look at and say hey this emergency is happening here. Let's look at our list of critical facilities and make sure we're not missing any. Um and then access and functional needs. Um uh there's a discussion on that about how we help those community members um either evacuate if they need to make sure that they're on public warnings like route county alerts or community connect and that sort of stuff. Um it outlines our emergency declaration process. So we're not doing that last minute and trying to remind ourselves, hey, how does this happen? Can we do it? Is it the city manager that can do it? Um do we need counsel? What's the form

we have? So it has um a template that um that we've run by legal um for our situation and kind of outlines how that process would be and then obviously um we're sort of adding a little bit of a another layer of emergency spending process. Um so the concept of operations is that the city would initiate um you know any response level at the lowest level. So, um, I'll take, well, let's use wildfire as an example that if we have a small wildland fire start up on Woodchuck Hill, um, on a windy day, obviously the fire department's going to be first response, we're going to get out there and if we can handle the incident, we take care of the incident. If it turns into a high wind day and embers are flowing and and the grass is taking off and we're starting to have structures threatened and we're starting to see the need for evacuations, this would kick in the emergency um operations plan. So, more than likely the fire department would stay as incident command, but it would bring together the rest of our team um and we would be able to start making decisions in the framework of incident command structure and national incident management. Um so IC and the city's response team would be activated at whatever level that might be. The example I gave you before of a water main break might result in um the public works director and their organization is going to take care of the water break, but we still need the the public information to get involved. If we're going to be spending money outside of our budget, we want to make sure finance is aware and we have the ability to do that. So it's a scalable um system. Um, and then really if uh what we talk about in this plan is well what happens when it gets beyond our resources and the city's resources aren't going to cut it anymore and we're contemplating money that we would need to be reimbursed by state emergency funds or whatnot. Um, now we start getting in the county emergency off office of emergency management. Um, their EOP and their EOC

will kick into effect. They'll be helping support us through the event. Um and then obviously that can continue to go to state and federal levels if uh if if that's the way the situation goes. So it's activated when an an event occurs. Um it's uh then moving into an actual emergency declaration. Um that's something that the city manager can initiate and then that would last for 7 days and we would then need um council to act. Um we saw that in COVID that was another good example of when this actually played out for us. Um, so why would we do a declaration? Um, obviously that would activate our EOP, but it would also easily allow the county's EOP to to ramp up and get involved and then bring in potential state money um and state resources. So, we want to be able to get on those that that declaration quickly. Um, it would enable resources and funding and then um and then we the governing board as yourself would need to continue it past seven days. So the incident command structure which this is predicated on um really provides that list of items. So the the unified command structure what we find is when we don't have a command structure we have people that are sort of all doing their own thing and nobody's talking to each other and they're all doing what they think they should be doing but maybe not under the the direction and no understanding of the of the the incident command. So it really brings that all together. It defines a clear chain of command, um, a manageable span of control, so no one person is trying to to navigate 12, 20 people underneath them because we know that doesn't work. Um, everybody knows their role coming in. And that's one of the things that we've been training on as leadership team is defining our roles. And we're going to be diving into a little bit more of this is going to be your role when you show up. This is going to be your role when you show up. Um, and then it creates an accountability system, which is important. Um and communications is the other big aspect of that. One of the things we know goes

wrong in larger events. Um that's one of the top items that we talk about after every one of them is how did the communications work. So um the primary command center that we have identified in this plan is the cheapy room. Um and that's a uh a room that that so that's like initially where we would respond if we feel we need a physical presence. Um, that being said, incident command likely would be somewhere else. They incident command might end up being over in the fire department conference room and then the policy decisions or the policy group would actually maybe go in Kitten Creek because what we don't want is all those people surrounding incident command trying to provide them information and input. So you as policy group would also be there with um liaison. So for instance, if it was a school event, god forbid something like a school shooting, we would want the superintendent of schools or someone that understands the school's plans with you in that policy room and then the city manager in that case would be working as the liaison between the council um folks like that. Maybe if it's a water event, we have Mount Warner water there. Um and then they would make being insured, Tom would be making sure that the information is getting to incident command um appropriately. information flow in that sense is per is is ideal, but also information flow out to the public. What we don't want is a lot of people trying to tell the public what to do. It has to be coordinated through our public communication process. Um, and incident command needs to know what's going out and really signs off on everything that gets released to the public. Um, and then obviously there'd be coordination uh with the EOC like I've talked about. This is what that structure looks like. probably very familiar for folks that know incident ICS at all. Um, but as you can see, the public information officer, the safety officer, and that liaison officer are really part of the command staff. They're really kind of right

there with incident command. And then the other section chiefs are where would be in our command center and they would be working on their roles um together. The idea is not to have people working in bubbles um but we just want to make sure that the communication um is in a structured format. So real quick, those are all the sections. Obviously, incident command is overseeing the whole event. Incident command does not necessarily have to be an expert in whatever the incident is. They just really need to know how to run an incident command system and understand the information that's coming to them. Operations, however, is when you get into experts of what you're doing. They're the boots on the ground fixing the problem. So that's where most of incidents will just have incident command and operations and will hopefully be able to manage most incidents that way. You might, as I said, bring in a logistics or a finance person to help. Um, and then it can be scalable as you go. Planning is in charge of ma understanding what the incident's objectives are, how we're going to manage that incident objectives, and creating an incident action plan for the for the um operational period, whether it's 12 hours, 24 hours, 8 hours. Um logistics is in charge of getting things. So, um not only the resources, so more than likely operations already got our mutual aid folks like in a in a fire situation. We've already got fire engines there. But what we might need are additional law enforcement officers um beyond what we have staffed in our in our district to help with evacuations. So if we're needing five more officers and patrol cars, um logistics would say, "Okay, let's see if Grand County can help us out. How do we get them here?" And then they're bouncing that off finance to say, "Hey, we're going to order five patrol officers. We think it'll cost this much. Finance, can we do that?" And finance helps gives that nod. Finance also works on tracking everybody's expenditures to make sure we're we're dialed in for potential reimbursement um

and making sure we're following our spending our spending rules and our spending authority. I mentioned PIO and then uh you folks as policy groups. So um when it comes to the emergency spending authority, this is one of the questions we have for you tonight. Um the current language in the charter um for emergency spending would require council to come together and make an emergency appropriations for spending. Um what the county does and what we discussed is um we might not have the time and and luxury to to reach out, make sure council gets together and makes that um emergency appropriations in time for what we might be trying to make um to spend money on. So, for instance, a um a pre-approval for a contract um for a vendor to set up sheltering uh vendor to bring in portallettes for that um uh road closures and evacuations. Right. So, what what we're proposing um and this was um Kim had reached out to the county on this one. We came up with um language similar to what they have that would allow pre-declaration spending limits of $10,000 per single purchase um for a total of $100,000 for a single event without pre-approval from the city manager or the city council. That would be through the incident command. More than likely, they're talking to city manager saying, "Hey, we're moving down this road." Um, but a fast-moving wildfire would require fast decisions and potentially a lot of resource ordering. Um, and then any additional funds beyond that, the city manager would request um through city council through an emergency ordinance. So, the hope is we would buy us some time um prior to having to get council together um to at least start making taking actions right away. Um the the plan ensures essential government functions uh continue during the event. So this is also an area we're

looking for a little bit of guidance and I apologize there was a couple kind of conflicting slide and and emergency operation plan um that Councilman Augusta noticed. But what the two things we're focused on here with continuity of government is one uh your roles as the governing body. What if and CO was a good example of this. What if five of you were bedridden with COVID and could not get out of bed and we needed um council to convene and pass an emergency ordinance? What happens in that case? How do we get that passed? So, what is the continuity of government um from that standpoint? The other one would be and particularly in positions like the city manager is he's listed in uh and that position in particular is listed in the charter as having many authorities on his on in our our case with Tom. um what happens if he can't do those? What happens if he's bedridden or unable to come and make those decisions? It's obvious that we first would move to probably the deputy city manager, but what happens beyond that? And so, we want to contemplate those things ahead of time um and have them in a in an emergency operation plan so that we can we can take quick action. Um this was an example. What I will say is I believe where we've landed with the continuity of government is that um Dan will be reaching out to you with some draft um language and some ideas um to to convene the next steps on how we want to write this into the plan. Um so we won't get into too many of these slides because they really just say what I just mentioned is um you know if the city manager isn't there uh like this might be a list we would see. So, deputy city manager, finance director, public works director, you know, um just kind of going through our our leadership team at that point. Um so, part a big part of this is communication. Um the now the county has a communication plan. Um, we're not going to rewrite a whole communication

plan, but one of the things we do have in this that will be an appendix is a crisis communication plan that helps our comm community our communication team understand a little bit ahead of time um who they might be needing to reach out to, how they might do that through what channels and that sort of thing. Now, we'll be utilizing the the Route County Communications Center for things like emergency notification, um evacuation notifications, that sort of thing, as well as response communications. Um and then on a larger incident, you would actually have ramp up your information center into what's called a JIC or a joint information center. Um and then there's constant review of this plan. How are we doing when we're running exercises, when we're actually doing events? Um what I would anticipate is we're going to I would really push our team to think about implementing this um even on smaller situations so that we can all practice and get into that sort of thing. Um so we would update it or re look at every time we do an exercise or an incident. Um and then we would support it with training. Um and so that's not only for our team but as the time goes on I would see us get diving deeper into the deputies and the the other folks within our organization as well as council. Um uh we do have uh just as a side note, we actually have a planned exercise this November that we're that is actually being sponsored through um the Row County Office of Emergency Management um where we'll be doing a simulation um that would affect the city quite dramatically um that we'll take on and I'll give you more information as we move on. I don't know what you roles everyone will have so I don't want to give away the the endgame now. Um so obviously uh the EOP ultimately protects residents, provides clear authority and structure, enhances that coordination, hopefully results in a a better and more efficient response and supports community recovery. Um so as I mentioned some of the actions

are um we will be looking for the nod and some direction on those two topics to come back to you with a a completed plan um for adoption later on in the year. Um, I would like to convene a training that the city uh that the office of emergency management does for elected officials. Um, so I'd like to get that on your radar for later on this year. Um, and it really talks about what your role is um in emergencies and in disasters in your community. Um, and then we would continue to work with our regional partners, particularly OEM, um, for this fall exercise. Um, and in the meantime, uh, as we continue our training as leadership team, we're going to be plugging away at some smaller scenarios and seeing how it works. So, now we're back to those questions.

Okay. Thank you, Chuck. Yeah, thank you. Nice to see you twice tonight. Yes, I know it's maybe too much of me in one evening. So, what questions? Uh, just try help me understand just a little bit. I I totally agree. Everything we did was fantastic. Um, how does Mo fit into this and and explain to me a little bit more detail about his role in the county and then how does

Yeah, so the county um the county really uh so some some municipalities and typically smaller municipalities might actually just adopt the county's emergency operation plan as theirs. Um what that does though and I and what I've learned over the years in working with the county and with the city is that oftentimes um it's not that we're not on the same page, but we're not on the same understanding of how things would flow. And so this is a good attempt to get the city sort of speaking the same language as the county in their emergency operations so that when we need um additional help um we're able to reach out for and we're then talking in the same language. Now, where does the county come into play? Typically, the county will come into play as soon as we've gone beyond our ability resource-wise to manage an incident. So, on a fire, um, and particularly a wildland fire, I will say that happens pretty quick. Everything I just told you earlier, um, comes into play very quickly. If we have a fire that is fastm moving, we don't have the resources to stop it. So, we're if it's close to structures or a population, we are very quickly changing our approach to saying how do we get people out of the way um and the fire is going to do what the fire is going to do. But we've immediately said we've gone out of our resources, we now want are going to bring the county in and when they agree to take over the incident, they agree to take over um the financing of the incident. Now, it doesn't mean that they're going to take over incident command or all of a sudden our resources are gone and the county has resources. It just means that they're taking over the responsibility of that event. Um so, uh that happens differently for every event. Um but then their their emergency operations plan kicks in. Now, they have a couple of different things. They have a type four incident management team that could help out um on an incident um

actually manage it depending on our situation. But they also can stand up their emergency operations center. The emergency operations center is actually a group of people some of which our leadership team participates in that that are are experts in their field and they each have an emergency support function or an ESF. Um, and that team or that EOC is designed to help the management team do what they need to do. So, when I mentioned logistics, um, and incident command says, hey, we're going to evacuate these five blocks. Let's set up a shelter. Our logistics is going to be like, well, I don't know, like what do I need to set up a shelter? That's when they would turn to Mo's team and his EOC and say, hey, we need sheltering. What do you guys have in place? Who do you have that can help us? and then their um emergency operations center would make sure that we we get what we need. So they're really a support for us up to a certain point and then they um um they either take over fi fiscal responsibility um or it might be a cost share, right? It might be that they're saying look um this is still largely on city property. Let's come up with a cost share of how this will work.

And now is this currently um they have an EOP? We don't. So right now we're depending on them for the whole county and the city for an incident or um yes and no. I mean their EOP they they come into play when we ask them. Okay. So um currently or I'd say a year pri prior to this um an event might happen we would find ourselves trying to figure out how to manage it and then at some point we probably would have said hey Mo can you help us out with uh standing up your EOC? Gotcha. Okay, Ryan.

Uh, so just to make sure I'm understanding correctly, page 16 of the document, section 22, that is what triggers that's like what triggers all of this, right? So it says that a local disaster may be declared by the principal executive officer. Mhm. And that means Tom. So Tom would be the one who makes that call. That's what triggers all of this. Well, that's the disaster declaration.

Okay. So, what would trigger this could be uh that water mane leak and so John's people um discover a water man that's going to affect all a whole neighborhood, hundreds of people, and they're like, "Oh, this is a big deal. Like, we need to get messaging out, whatever." So, they contact John and John realizes right off the bat, hey, this is this is a big deal. Yes, my crew can handle the water break itself, but I think we should get the team together to talk about how to message this, how we get people notified of it, um if we do need resources, if additional spending needs to be made. Um so really the EOP, the plan and the incident response team as it's in the document, um can be activated by any one of us. Um what what I I say anyone on leadership team easily, but that would probably come from some of our people. So, I could easily see my crew responding to a wildfire, telling me the situation and me saying, "Hey, I think I should activate the EOP."

Does that make sense? This gets into two questions I have. One, it's easy in a binary where it's that all of a sudden the entire town is on fire. But what about that gray area? COVID is a good example or how I would imagine a wildfire where it seems like is it going to happen or not and then immediately all of a sudden it happens. How how is that gray area managed? Because you don't want to call it too early but you don't want to call it too late. Like how do is there any plan for that?

Well um I mean my push is call it too early, right? like call like I immediately um a wildfire is another I'll just keep using that cuz that's my world right but immediately when we start needing resources and we start needing federal resources which is any air resource whatsoever all of a sudden I need to be on a whole different radio I need my radio that I talk with our dispatch on and this and physically trying to manage a situation with two radios in your ears is almost impossible so I encourage all of our folks to call for help early, get everybody coming, and if we need to stand down people or people are saying, "Oh, it looks like you don't need us." Great. That's the best case scenario. But you're at least ready for that that stand up of the next level. But you're absolutely right. The the challenge is is seeing the situation, anticipating might be coming, and then trying to make the call early.

So that's just part of leadership, basically. Yep. And that's why this is a scalable system, too. So the idea might be I just maybe I just call Tom first and say hey this is the situation. What do you think? And we start having a conversation and we're like maybe we should get Kim involved and then we reach out to her or her design and now and so now there's three of us and then and then the situation keeps growing and we're like let's get the whole team in here. So you know that's the way it would go.

Okay. And then my second question this is pretty farfetched. I trust all of you but we've seen wilder things happen. We're seeing in here that it how I read it unauthorized spend up to 10,000 up to a h 100,000 if there's an emergency with like are there any checks on that like defining an emergency like if you think about a bad actor right and it's like oh I'm going to say this is an emergency and I need to spend this once again it's a very faroff scenario but is there any kind of clear definition or something that is putting some kind of guardrails in place that could manage a potential bad actor. No. Okay, good to know. Thanks. Yep.

Well, the I guess the only thing I would answer to that is it's going to be more than one person, right? Because someone's not going to be able to go spend $10,000 without probably going to finance saying, "I need this money. We need to allocate this money somehow." So, it's not likely to be an individual that's making that decision. Um, now, could you get more than one bad actor? Absolutely. But um it in that scenario, you're not you're not going to be able to spend that money most likely with with just one person making that decision. And you know, I think the the other key is um it's it's it's it's who we bring on the organization and how we we we all act in our in our organization, right? Like that's really the big check and balance for me.

I won't make it political, but I think you get where I'm going. Thanks. Yep. Other questions?

So I I want to start off by saying thank you, you know, for for putting this together. I and you and I have talked about my you know my saying about you emergency evacuation plan. We we didn't have that this you know and that's a small piece to this whole big picture and I recognize that. Um and I recognize that this was a hole and I and it's a really important hole uh for us to fill especially with the nervousness that we have coming into this next um year. Um so but you know so I basically want to say thank you and given that in a month you know we could potentially have what we're all scared about you know you know this coming year what do we need to do to make sure that if it if it does come that soon is I know you're in a draft mode right now but are there certain things like and I think you had one of the questions up there and that may be you know the one thing you need is basically you know some ordinance to say hey you know during during during a declared mercy we have these funds.

It's a good question. Um I I mean my guess is that um until we have formally adopt this that that emerging spending um kind of authority wouldn't take into place. We'd be using the current language in the charter for that. Um but I think uh I and I believe in the charter it does there is a provision that says we can do what we need to do to save life and property from disaster. Um and and that's sort of the the understanding we at least in my world work under all the time. But I think maybe to address your other broader question is if something happened next week, I actually believe we could implement this to a degree with the understanding that we are all already have on our leadership team without the formal adoption.

Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I'm going to say I don't think we maybe speaking on behalf of myself and probably all of council is we certainly wouldn't want that technicality to get in the way. Amen. Right. I mean, we need to we know that we need to be ready at any moment in time. And so, again, applaud the work that you've done. Um, but I think we're ready to do whatever we need to do to make sure that it's the eyes are dotted and the tees are crossed, but we don't have to wait for that if if unfortunately something happens. Do you do you have any kind of um what thinking have you done about educating the public around this around the emergency operation plan?

Mhm. Um it just so happens we have an article coming to the newspaper about this. Okay. Um and really kind of summarizing just what I did and the um a lot of what the communication form has in it. And I was even thinking the monthly column that we we talked about. We'll put that in there. But I was thinking that even, you know, we bring some of this stuff like to the farmers market where we have some like brochures and stuff on things or posters, boards and stuff. This might be something that would um

Yeah, that's a great idea. And I we certainly can work with our communications department and Mike with that cuz um because one of the things in the plan um which we continually struggle to get the word out and people signed up for is Route County alerts. And Route County alerts um is not only a notification platform, but it also has the ability for folks to enter medical needs, um mobility needs, whatever it might be, so that if we evacuate a region, we can actually pull up and be flagged for some of those things. So, the more people that get registered for that, um the better. Okay. Any other questions for Chuck? Yeah, I have some questions.

Yep, it's on. Um, so ditto for all the work putting this together. Um, in my prior career, I actually lived in these types of plans, unfortunately. I'll tap into that. Yes. And we had to activate um the incident command um system several times and once for an active shooter

and then hostage situation. So, um, it's really important to have these plans in place, um, and for folks to understand their role. And so, I think for council, to me, that is the most important thing that we have to nail down that we need to understand our role and that we're all not calling Tom or you or anyone trying to get information. That will wreck the whole plan. Um, so, totally support it. So, now I'm get to my technical questions. Okay.

Um, and this might be for Dan. Um, and if you don't know, it's totally fine. Um, back to um, Brian's comment about 2.2 disaster declaration. We referenced um, state statute in here. When I looked that up, that statute, it really seemed like it was not any staff person that falls in that definition. I could be wrong, but I would love I just don't want to bind ourselves with a state statute about um the um principal executive officer of a political subdivision. Um we I just want to make sure we're really clear and that if it truly does say any staff person, I'm good. When I read that's not how I read it. Um again, we don't have to resolve it tonight. Just just want to flag it. Um and then since this is a living document um at the beginning of it and since we also were talking about the financial aspect which I support and agree with um on page I highlighted it let me find it here. Um, page five, approval and implementation. Um, and again, this is not a concern, Tom, with you.

Anytime that we're referencing council, any type of financial um, commitment or agreement, the one sentence that gave me pause was the last sentence in the first paragraph. um that the city manager essentially can make modif for formal notification um I'm sorry can modify the plan without formal notification or adoption by city council. I I don't know that just again I I don't have concerns but when I'm thinking about policy perspective and we're talking about our role as council and we have money in here that just I think we should talk about that whether we talk about tonight or if you all want to go back and talk about it I'm okay with that as well. Um, I think that those two may have been my only comments in here. And actually, I will um

I would just say to that last comment, I think maybe we could and we could discuss modifying it to um to something about significant modifications because I think what we want to try to avoid is every every little change having to come and go through the whole adoption process. Um, right. So we do want to make some be able to make some tweaks and and twists here and there without full adoption, but maybe find a good balance with that language.

Yeah, I to I totally agree about that. Um let's see here. I think um okay, do you mind going to page 20 uh 3.3 um the liaison andor policy group? Um maybe just talk about a little bit more about that and what that looks like. if you're able to. I didn't mean to put you on the spot. Um 3.3. Yes.

Um so the I the idea of the policy group really ultimately is um is getting liaons for the incident. So like I said either um sup school superintendent, water managers or policy makers uh like council together to for an opportunity for you to say here are our concerns. Um here's a direction that city that the incident commander is going to want to go they want to do this or that or the other thing. You're able to say well uh we we're concerned about this or that. um you know, or if we're maybe taking a a getting close to the edge of a policy that we're we're uncomfortable with or a direction, um that's the opportunity for those folks to to as policy decision makers to step in and say, "Hey, uh we'd rather see us do this or that." Um or andor the liaison aspect is making sure that we're not missing anything and experts can can get their information to incident.

Great. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. Perfect. Yeah. Thank you. Yep. All right. As long as we're diving in a little bit. Um, no, no, that's okay. I also had highlighted kind of under the city charter section 7.7 e emergency ordinances. And I think it's more just from the perspective of clarity, right? I mean, in terms of, you know, looking at that approved by a majority vote of council members present at any meeting. I mean, you know, to the extent that we don't want to have questions about what the authority is and who has the authority, does that mean there has to be a quorum? Right? I mean, so you know, again, kind of talking about from the perspective of you're in a an emergency situation. You have no idea where everybody is. Just, you know, kind of clarity.

Sorry, I missed your in the emergency operation plan or in the charter. You're you're referencing. Well, it says it's city charter. It's the under the 3.3 liaison emergency. You know, it's in there city charter 7.7 emergency ordinances. So, oh yeah, my only point is just I think as we look through this just clar making sure that there's real clarity in terms of does that mean you have to have a a quarum I mean I assume so but I don't know right so and I think that's going to go a little bit to the continuity of government discussion about well what if you can't get a quorum then what happens

right so that's so again that's what I just assume just as we read through this making sure that it's as clear as it can be in terms of what authority And what are the conditions? Well, that that is a charter provision and we can't change that without having an election. So, but does that mean right majority of vote of council member? I mean, so so that's interesting, right? So, there is a quorum provision in the charter that applies to emergency ordinances if that's what you're asking. Okay. So, I think it would So, you're saying there would have to be a quorum for council to adopt an emergency ordinance. you would have to have a quorum.

So, okay. I mean, that makes sense, but how and then just understanding how that all flows through in this from an implementation perspective. Well, I think that's one of the points of this presentation tonight is um if we can't get a quorum of council together because of an emergency situation, um that's a real problem because there are certain things that only council can do and there is some council authority to delegate um and provide for continuity of government. But, you know, big you know, we just can't the city manager can't adopt an ordinance. Um so, these are things that will need to be addressed. And one question you may end up having to answer is do you want to change the charter so that we can um you know anticipate like a real serious emergency that comes on quickly enough that council doesn't have time to react.

Yeah. You just think of troublesome, right? And the chaos that was happening in terms of the people leaving Grand Lake, not leaving Grand Lake, right? I mean, you know, when you're trying to evacuate and you don't have communication or know where everybody is. So, so I guess that's the question is would the continuity of of governance cure for that

to some extent? Yes. So, I think um we we recognize that that's this this discussion we've we started having and we're diving into and I I think um and I'm looking at the two of you guys to help me, but I think the plan is that we'll get together and contemplate some of these things and have probably reach out to council with clarification on how we want to how we want to proceed, whether it's actually a charter amendment or if it's um something regarding uh continuity of government. in here that that covers it or not. And I think I think we've kind of jumped into some of the council questions piece.

But before we go too far, let's let's just um open this up to public comment real quick. Is there anybody in the room who would like to make a public comment or anyone online who'd like to make a public comment? Please raise your hand. Okay, seeing none, we will close public comment and bring it back to to council to answer your questions, which I think we've kind of delved into a couple of them, but the first one really is, are there any questions or clarifications regarding the plan, which is kind of what we've been doing for a bit? Is there any other questions or clarifications about the plan? Are these appropriate questions for us to be digging into or is part of this you're just informing us and saying we're going to continue mulling over these concerns that you have and we'll be back. Um, so I think uh I mean I think the big one really is um and I the the feedback on emergency spending I guess that's one of the questions if you'd um if is the if the language in that's currently in there is sufficient or if you would like to some clarifications or modifications to that

sufficient I I think it's fine. I think my big concern is just talking through this like conflict between the charter and reality and thinking that through and potentially not to speak for council but recommending to us if there should be a charter amendment if right

we are worried. So, so for that last one we just discussed, what we'll do is um you know, uh city manager, city attorney, and myself will get together to contemplate some language and and figure out how we message that back and forth with council. Um then, so really the the big question then is um and I saw you all nodding when we were talking about it before, is are you interested in in training um at some point this year on on council's role in an emergency? Yes. All right. And so we'll coordinate that um through Teresa probably. And

yeah, I I the way you have this document written and the way we talked about it was it's essentially adopted by the city manager. And so that's a question whether this would be coming back for adoption, which is addressing councilor's uh councelor Dixon's question about, you know, what changes can be made by the city manager because if it's adopted by the city manager, ultimately the city manager would also make changes. But I'm wondering since there's a provision of funding um and the emergency funding if that particular section could be exempted from the city manager's approval. In other words, the city manager can adopt this but can't make any changes to the funding because ultimately any funding decision has to be right. And maybe that addresses your concern. Yeah, I would agree with that. Like

does Kim want to make a I just want to Kim Weber, finance director. I did want to clarify that any emergency spending on the $100,000 will also be a part of the annual budget process. So you will So the city manager couldn't change that to $500,000 without council approval because you will have to approve it as part of the budget process. So he could he or she could change it to $500,000, but it's only good if you've appropriated it. Just wanted to

Yeah. And I suspect um Council Swintech's concern was more that it wasn't really an emergency and we went out and spent $100,000 on something that we we wanted a new truck or something. Right. So, um I think that was probably more that was the angle that I was coming at. Yes. Right. The other thing I would say on this continuity of governance thing, I guess the question for me is always what's the worst case scenario and make sure that we can account for that, right? Whatever that is. Yeah, that's it's always tough when we dive into those a little bit because sometimes we get so far into the worst case scenario that we're like seriously like we're contemplating this. Well, I think but from maybe that's my world. So,

yeah, I think that's a good point. Um and and and that's really where we were going a little bit with it, I would say, is what happens if f seven council members can't show up,

six council members can't show up. This is an interesting uh work session topic. Um that was I was on council 3 months, four months and then COVID hit and you know experiencing the leadership role from a citizen to have to be in this seat up here cutting budgets 20%. You know that's kind of the limit. Um but what we also realized was um that the county had a lot more leadership role. Jason Lacy was president at the time and we really because we were just the city within the county it was a kind of different deal. Um but I know the deer in the headlight look for all seven of us was like what is our role in this whole thing

right the shutdown and the citizens and everything else. So, I mean, it's great to have this conversation on a city level, not just the county level, so that we can continue to be good leaders and and know that, you know, it's part of our orientation that we hope we don't have to use this, but at least if we do, we know our roles and I think that's highly successful. Okay, any other comments for Chuck? Um, two great presentations tonight. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. I appreciate your time. One more question. What room is the primary command center in again?

Doesn't want me to say it. They all know I can't I I cannot say. I wish it was the Smith room. Yeah, spell it. That if you can't say it, you have to spell it. And I did just I mean I just wanted to follow up on kind of this last the last comment you made, Tom. I mean, um, in terms of the intention here is that it this is really a a manager approved document and not necessarily a council approved and just maybe talk me through the rationale for that.

Well, and I actually have that I do have that highlighted for discussion as well. Um, because there's a the a statement and unfortunately I just closed my computer. Um, there is a statement at the beginning that that talks about um either adoption by the council or city manager. Um so I um that is something we can um we can discuss. Right now it's a city manager approved document. Um and so when we talked about council adopting it um I don't know if that um maybe that wasn't exactly what we were envisioning. So I think maybe that could be another conversation we we just throw back to council to make sure everyone's on the same page.

I think that's worthy of a conversation. I mean and I think it kind of goes back to that other comment that we were talking about in terms of changes right I mean in the sense of giving some sort you know not make giving the flexibility needed in the document but I think it's worthy of a discussion in terms of just understanding the distinction.

So Chuck time frame on when we might hear back from you on this. So, um, we're pretty far along on this, um, especially with the little bit of guidance, and we'll jump on the continuity of government. I think that's really the the outstanding one. Um, and then I'm I'm actually pretty close on the evacuation plan, too, which I really want to include in this, although I could see moving forward with this plan and the appendices that we have in place and then filling in with the evacuation plan um, once it's complete. We're working with the county on dialing in evacuation zones. um and then creating our city document on uh evacuation routes and how we would potentially handle that. So, we're kind of at the tail end of that discussion with um our city evacuation plan. So, I I think by I think by June um we should probably have this to a point where we're ready to go.

Well, those evacuation plans include Stone Lane. Oh god. Just kidding. Just kidding. their routes. Evacuation routes currently exist as roads. I know. I know it doesn't exist. So, all right. How do you improve it? Are we good everyone? Thank you, Chuck. Chuck, have a good night. It's a work session, but anything else? We had a regular meeting, so we need to adjourn. Oh, we do need to adjourn. We are going to our council. Oh, move to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Yes. Yes. Move to adjurnn. Second. Second. All in favor? I we are ajourned. So, thank you.