City Council - Regular Meeting

I guess we'll go ahead and get started. Thank you all. Are there any questions about the agenda tonight? Hans, any updates from you? You have one update, so I just wanted to give a brief branch update. So I think we have had a lot of interest on social media. We've been a lot of people following along with this. This is a bit of a reminder. We did it. You notice last week until today. We did receive 111 animals from us. That was 107 hundred hamsters and rats. They of were hamsters and 11 puppies. Not on the list. I also know there were crickets. We also, did some crickets. So, that we have been in communication with the owner. So the cost of care for the animals was pretty significant. So at this point, the cat's owner has relinquished the rights to the animals. That, allowed sort of the, the clock to stop on her expenses related to the care of the animals. At this point, we have received relinquishment of the animals. And so those are now officially transferred to the reveal animal shelter. The puppies are in quarantine, and they will be monitoring the sort of the health and suitability, of the dogs for adoption for a little bit. In a while. So we don't anticipate that there will be any of the, the puppies that were available that will be available for adoption, potentially for up to several weeks. So, but ultimately, I think, all of the animals are being cared for. We appreciate the work of our finance team, our animal control team, and the partnership of Riverdale

that, allowed this to all play out pretty smoothly. That's it? Yep. Any any questions or any updates from you? Yeah. Thank you. All right. We could jump right into things. We have an update on the Alpr technology. And so I'm going to hand this, right to, the chief, I think, for a brief introduction. This is a poll of. I do want to make sure that both the public and that council know there's a pretty lengthy memo that is attached. And so we'll briefly touch on this presentation. So like on that, in the email that the, the focus of this presentation is sort of the key policy issues and direction that was given to the council at your last discussion that I'll give the floor to chief. And, my boss just said everything I was going to say. So I put it right over the staff. All right. Thank you. As mentioned, we're going to provide, some follow up, to counsel regarding the department's use of the automatic license plate reader technology, specifically some updates, from the February 3rd, meeting itself. Just as, a reminder and some follow up or background, the department's, once again, utilizing the our system in 2019. With the use of the Leonardo camera system, we then expanded the use of the open door system in 2022. We first began using the the flock safety cameras, and we expanded on that system in 2024. Again, here are the locations of our current LPR cameras. Again, all of them were specifically deployed primarily at rest locations in the city, with the intent of being able to utilize these systems,

to help, prevent crime or additi As mentioned, Council was provided a memorandum from the department late last week. A copy of that memorandum, what is provided in the, packet for tonight as well? The memorandum specifically talked about, the question in regards to the inclusion of police numbers with searches. And I'll speak to that a little bit more, tonight and some changes that are being made. There was also some question regarding the criteria that's used to evaluate outside agency searches and reasons for, revocation of their access. So that one I'll touch on as well. When I speak more specifically about the changes in the audit process, there were some questions regarding the previous searches are conducted with, Homeland Security or agency identified as the reasons we touched on that. The question regarding the convoy searches and why none of those were specifically included. And then we also provided some comparison of, foreign to other agencies that are currently using flock, to include the, number of cameras that other jurisdictions are using. In comparison to the city of Horton. And to look at that comparison to population and size of jurisdiction. And then also, touched on the question regarding the just requirements, for, alpr systems and the concern regarding MFA. I think it's important to know that our city IT department is currently, doing a full cybersecurity review of flock. And that system from all different directions.

Flock has been extremely cooperative in that process. The IT director is here as well. If needed to speak to that a little bit more that we are waiting on a few of our questions to be answered. And finalized before we are completely comfortable, with flock from a security perspective. But to date, I can tell you that there have been no red flags of any kind that, have been brought to my attention. But jump into, the audit process. So as a reminder, in February, when we first went through this, I had talked about the mandatory offense dropdown box that flock had added to the system. We looked at that as desirable in that it would require officers to identify an actual crime or legitimate law enforcement reason for the purpose of their search. At that time, audits were also only being completed by one system administrator, which was myself. And the goal was to complete, at least one audit per month. Changes, to the audit process that, we are looking to implement. First and foremost, in regards to the mandatory boxes and the use of case numbers or call for service numbers. It is our intent to make the second reason box, which is has previously been just a free text box, a mandatory box that would actually be another drop down box. If you recall from the first presentation. We've identified that the three primary uses of this system are to support calls for service case investigations or to do some, additional searches

related to the alerts that come through the system. But making these mandatory, what we believe we're doing is, from the audit perspective, we should start seeing significantly more case numbers and call for service numbers included with assertions. And if they're not included, it'll stand out like a red flag. During the audit process, I've also discovered that should a search be completed for an alert, I can search against the alert page to verify that that license plate number actually did. Provide an alert to the system. So given us the ability to audit the internal use of the system that much more, specifically, we're also going to start conducting the audits, once a week, and we'll be adding additional employees for a total of five, and we'll have the ability to conduct those audits. The other four employees that are going to be added to this, they currently conduct other audits on systems within our organization. And we do not believe, that adding this to what they're doing currently will be burdensome, in any way. But give us the opportunity to, to pay much closer attention to the use of, this system. The other thing that we're going to implement is an actual audit log to record the audits that are conducted, capturing, at bare minimum, the audit date, the date and time frame of the audit, whether or not there were concerns found and what were the results of, those concerns through investigation and how were they, addressed? And then, also include who it was that

specifically completed that audit at that time. Additionally, we will have the ability because the audit is downloadable as an Excel spreadsheet. We'll have the ability to very easily see the total number of searches that any individual officer is conducting. We will be able to compare days of the week for those searches against the officers. Known work schedule. We'll obviously evaluate the reasons and have that additional mandatory drop down box, to give us something else more specifically to look at, continue to audit for overall compliance with state law and department policy. Any issues that are identified, will be investigated. And as noted earlier, not documented in the audit log. It's, I think, important to note that to date, we have not found any evidence of, misuse by department employees. When questions have come up, we have investigated those and, have had those results come back favorably and that the system was being properly utilized. We will have the ability to review all searches that are conducted in the system. Specifically to compare to that criteria of whether or not a case number was used, was a call for service, number included. And then look into the alerts, that much closer. And as mentioned previously city it is currently reviewing the overall system. And its security features. Are you move on. Yes. Appreciate all the additional work on this. You're going to track the days of the week, but what about hours?

So, like, if an officer work during the day, depending the evening is going. In fact, it's very important that it's. Yes. Actually, the spreadsheet that I've designed does both. It does the day of the week specifically, and the time frame in which the search was conducted. So yes, we would be able to also take a look, at the time, in comparison with the day itself and the day of the week. Okay. Follow up then. Can you elaborate a little bit more on the evaluation of the reasons for the search, like how are those evaluated or deemed accurate? I appreciate the evaluation, but could you go a little bit further into the process of that evaluation of what that actually yields? Yes. So, with the inclusion of that additional information, we will be able to take a sample of all of the searches that are completed and actually search and pull up the specific case report number to make sure that the search that was conducted in the license plate or in fact, related to that specific case, or the same we can do for a case, a call for service number. We can go back, pull up that call for service number, read the facts and the details of that call for service, and verify that the search that was conducted, matches the information that was provided in that call card and that that search, specifically in what they entered in, makes sense compared to the information provided. And then with the audits or I'm sorry, the alerts, that one will be easy in that we'll be able to search that specific license plate because alerts, alert to specific plate numbers. We'll be able to go back and search and verify. Yes. This license plate, in fact alerted to the system

and therefore the search conduct Okay. When it comes to the, external audit, we will continue to focus as we have in the past on compliance with state law. Very specifically, searches, related to immigration or legally protected, health care and whether or not any of those are included in the other section. And I'll speak to that a little bit more here in a second. Also, we're also reviewing, for compliance with department policy and specifically what we will have the ability to do is look at all of the searches that used other as a reason, and we will look at those specifically for any, very obvious vagueness. And usually what an example of that would be is it'll just be other and no additional information. It may be other and just leave and give me no indication as to why the search was actually conducted. So any time the other is used, we'll look at every single one of those. And if we find anything that's concerning, that will result in an automatic revocation of that agency's access, to our system. And then we will also do a random sample of these searches and look at those, closer specifically looking for, did they include any additional reason, is there any indication that those were searches completed, in regards to immigration or legally protected healthcare? Unfortunately, obviously with the external audit, there is no way for us to completely verify

those searches to the same level that we can the internet searches, because there's not as much detail provided in those, that we won't be able to verify those to the same degree as we will the internal searches. What type of number? I mean, you can see a 500% increase on those that are. But with these external searches and things like, what type of numbers are we still talking about for these five to include yourself to audit, to be able to audit. Yeah. So we we are we haven't identified the specific number part of what will be determined will be, once the team as a whole starts getting into these and doing these audits on a regular basis, I think we'll have a much better idea as to what that sample can would contain and how many of those we would actually look at. Very specifically, we haven't identified that number, yet. And what that's going to be. Exactly. But having been doing these for a number of months now, I feel comfortable that we will be able to hopefully, anyways, find anything that is obviously immigration related, HSC related, those types of things, because we can also search for those type of keywords to see of those kids. And usually that's always been part of my process. Is there anything very specific to immigration, or abortion, things like that. So we'll focus in as best as we can on the stuff that ties to state law. And what is prohibited specifically in the state of Colorado. What that number is exactly. I don't know for sure at this time. Yes. Awesome. What is the timeline on training these new employees to conduct the audits?

If this is something that, won't, take very long at all. My desire was to get through this to see if there was anything additional counsel wanted to include. For our consideration. And once we're comfortable with this is what the audit process is going to look like, we will start rolling that out. And there's no reason why we shouldn't have that in place. You know, within a couple of weeks, depending on schedules. For these employees that I haven't looked at specifically. Okay. What does the training look like? So what my, the plan is, is to, as a group, go through and actually show them what we are looking for when it comes to the audit process. So basically walk through an audit step by step with these individuals, so that they know what it is that we're looking to accomplish, how to do it. And I suspect they may even have some suggestions that, haven't come up yet on ways that we may even, fine tune this a little bit. But ultimately we are going to walk through this process step by step to make sure everybody has an understanding of what it is we're looking to accomplish. And then also provide them some written, guidance as to basically, here are the things you need to check off every time you do this audit. Have you done this? Have you done this? Have you done this? Okay. This fork off for any products or services that can assist with the audit process. Like this. Seems like a great way to leverage AI tools. And you know, being a tech company seems like they might want to. Yes. That was actually my next slide. Will roll right into that. Thank you. And I think I forgot to mention this, at the February meeting, we were made aware of this late last year. That fork was actually looking to develop

a tool within the system that would run, by itself and proactively check the system and, alert administrators in real time, to any unusual or suspicious search activity. I don't I don't know exactly when they plan on rolling that out, but they have as late as last week, stood by the fact that this is in testing currently. And they anticipate rolling this out, sometime this year, two agencies, to assist us in this auditing process and unfortunately have no idea what that looks like. I think anything will be helpful and beneficial to us. We'll just have to obviously wait and see what that is. There was a, question regarding some comparison of the LPR systems with, other vendors. We specifically or looked, Motorola and Axon. We've heard a lot of good things, about their systems, throughout the country. So we took some time and met with them. Ultimately, all three of these systems very much work the same way. There aren't any features with any within any one of them that makes one stand out significantly more than other. All tell us that the, follow si just compliancy. Surprisingly, all of them, have MFA as an option controlled by the agency itself. Which I was surprised to find the the biggest difference with FLoC is when it comes to national and state wide searches or the ability to network nationally and state wide. They have basically a box that you can check to say, okay,

we want to share nationally or statewide and allow agencies who are conducting searches of very specific license plates to search against our our network. The other two vendors limited to 1 to 1, agreements. So we would have the ability through those to share with any agency within the country, but it would require us to specifically send a request through the system to them asking permission to share. If it's approved, then we, have that ability similar to what we're doing now, within flock, I think one of the, the, bigger drawbacks in my mind with the Motorola system is that the installation of those cameras would specifically fall on the agency. And I would see that as being burdensome, to the organization because we would have to at least identify an employee who would be trained in how to do that. That then results in, us handling permitting for the placement of those cameras. And then it would also require us to coordinate with other city departments, to have access and the ability to, you know, utilize a boom box to get up to a pole to install these, so significantly more work would fall on the agency, through the Motorola system. Yes. I'm sorry. I'm looking at the table and, this is, under review for floor. Was is that referring to the review that. Yes. Correct. Yeah. We we obviously know that, they have told us that they are just compliant, but we are obviously doing a full review of that to confirm that with the help of our IT department that you. And then this is obviously,

separate from the of your conversation. But the question came up, the February meeting of looking for some additional information to Flock's audio detection system. Worth mentioning that, even though as a department we're familiar with this, we are currently not recommending, this technology as a priority. However, some of the features of this system are significantly different than other systems that I'm aware of. Most systems focus specifically on gunshot detection and gunshot detection alone. Flock has actually expanded upon that to include slide slide show detection, which is basically your street racers, your vehicles that are doing burnouts, loud, revving engines, the ability to detect those, the ability to detect crash detection, and collisions associated with, accidents that may have severe injuries. The ability to detect, distress calls for help, cries for help, things of that nature screams. And then also the the ability to, distinguish between fireworks and gunfire. And then ultimately, the system uses triangulation to try to help determine where that's coming from, to give us some place to respond, to start, looking for these things. If we hadn't received a call for service. 100% citywide coverage, using the flock safety, audio detection system, which they refer to as the Raven system, would cost a estimated $1.3 million. Again, as you're aware, there's currently a public safety technology, team, and we're in the process of putting together a public safety technology action plan.

This is something that is on that list. Again, not a priority from the department's perspective. And if we were to go in this direction, our recommendation would be that we utilize, call for service data and use that information to roll the system out in stages and specifically focus on areas where we're getting a majority, or more calls for service that, are pertaining to gunfire and things of that nature. Would be how about how we would go about recommending rolling that out if we were to go in that direction? I'll turn this little part of the country. Yeah. So obviously we recognize, the importance of transparency. We know that building trust definitely takes time, and we're always working to build that trust. We're always willing to evolve to meet the needs of our community because those are constantly changing. So I think that's a big foundation of this discussion we did as a follow up to our February meeting, update our LPR page on our website. And that's under transparency and cameras and technology. I think we've shared this with some of you that we're going to be migrating our website to a new site soon. So it's looking a little bit different right now. It's under construction, a little bit, but you can still find this under cameras and technology. And we expanded that FAQ section to include questions that we received, at our February meeting, as well as questions that we've seen come up, over time with community members. And so that has been expanded. We added the presentation materials from our February meeting. So there's a link to the video from that last meeting, as well as the PowerPoint presentation. Just so that the community can easily find it, they don't have to dig through, previous council meeting information. And then as we discussed last time as well, we did launch an online question forum for additional community feedback.

So that's been live since the beginning of March, and we shared that information across our social media on March 10th. Just letting our audience online know, did you know we recently shared information about how we use this system in this type of technology? Here's a link if you have further questions, please, submit your forms and we'll add to our FAQ as we can as those come in. And then, that was also pushed out through our Weekly Briefing e-newsletter. And that was distributed on March 11th. And some of the engagement we've seen as of April 1st on that web page, we've had 675 total visits. 487 of those came in starting in, February. So when that discussion was really, starting with, with you all and then social media reach over 15,800 views on Facebook. That is almost 10,500 individuals reached 16 link clicks from there. And then our other, combined platforms, over 4500 impressions, newsletter goes to over 3100 people. That one was opened by over 1300 with six link clicks so far on that question, for we have not received any additional questions. Chris, do things, could you provide an update on whether or not there's been some consideration to doing just like a community type meeting on this, like Alpers and where? Yes, we have members of the community that are here and, you know, it's a little bit more the task orientation to go online and do things. So have we come to a decision yet? Let's just do a, community meeting on discussing the technology, how it benefits the community. Maybe some of the hurdles. And there's a lot of great information on updates and what you guys are able to take from the last meeting. Now. So we have to point now, or do we see that

in the near future where, you know, we can really test it with live residents in person, being able to participate outside of our planning sessions? I think we're definitely further than we were at the last meeting. I think the balancing act, as we talked about before, is just trying to avoid, you know, a policy related debate, with the community. But I think from a presentation standpoint and being able to field questions, I think we are at the point where we could find some type of forum to do that with maybe one of our existing upcoming engagement pieces. Maybe not as a standalone, but, you know, as one of the many topics that we're talking about. But that's that's the inherent tension. And that is what we talked about last time. So I think that issue would still be present. We just have to find a way to kind of thread that needle, Councilman. So inching closer but just not ready yet. I think that's an active. Yes. Okay. And then my second piece was the last time I was on the website, and I brought this up last meeting as well. Seems like, I know it's a testimonial by the flock, video that was out there. My thought, the suggestion being around, you know, we did, Todd. And do our own comms. We have something that is more personable. It's about we have our own success stories that brings it closer to home. And the real and real issue with that, again, is because so many different services for the city. But yet we don't promote specific companies with their own production or own produced video content. So, you know, to alleviate that, what if we did our own versus utilizing theirs? Well, I just again, that I don't see why, you know, we don't have numerous companies all over our website that provide vital services to our residents,

and it seems almost like we've chosen this one, and it's the only one allowed on our robust city page. How do we steer away from that? So it doesn't look like they're getting an edge where we don't offer that to various other companies that provide services. We can definitely look at that truck. You know that I don't really have an issue with that. I don't know that we did the follow up. We committed to to look at the website as a whole to see what other if. There are other examples of ADUs. I'm not clear on that piece of it, but that's that's frankly not a heavy lift we can share. We should make that happen if that's where we feel the goal is to continue to build the trust. And it's something that's constantly in the headlines. You can see surrounding the city is all having the same conversations. And I think the efforts on our end need to be focused more and impactful in terms of, you know, we're work. They are a partner of ours, but they're not getting kind of special treatment. So how do we separate that so that we can get more community by community trust? And perhaps then not having a very specific produced video from the company that's the partner would would build that trust. And I know you guys are working very hard on that. So that's why I'm bringing these suggestions for so that a little separation sometimes is good. And then the system is a system, whether it's axon, Motorola or FLoC. You know, we've seen technological advances with internet, social media, cell phones, like it's here you go to Europe, there's cameras everywhere. We understand that. But perhaps the vagueness and beginning made for a rocky start. So how do we capture some of that by and again, and I think a little separation and knowing that there's various partners might present that there's several questions. Where did you come up with the figures for the axon cost?

From axon themselves? They provided that to me because from what I understand, $3,000 a camera. I can't speak to what agreement they came to, with Denver, but, that is what they provided to me as a per year or so. One of the things that's unique about axon is that they have such a, heavy presence in law enforcement technology in general that, a lot of times what you'll see with is they kind of roll in a lot of their products. And so there could be a reduced pricing because they have, LPR is in their cars and their video cameras. They have their fuzes, real time crime centers. So there's isn't quite as easy to pick apart. It's not siloed like the others are. So that might be one explanation to Councilman. And I also do know that, when they quoted us, they also looked at it from the perspective that we would need to utilize their pull for each of those installations. So that does add cost. Whereas if we are able to identify locations and utilize an existing pole, then the cost is not as expensive. Plus, axon actually provides a couple different cameras, for LPR purposes. I asked them specifically for a quote on the system that's closest to flock and how flock works. And is solar powered. They do also offer a system that is, plugs into AC power directly. So that may also account for, differences in price. Also, when somebody submits a question, how are you going about answering? We haven't had any questions come in yet,

but it comes into the Pio email address. And then based off that question, we take a look at what's available, on our website. If our FAQ has already addressed that question, things like that. And then we'd probably go from there to figure out the best way to address it. So you just revert that back to starting over. If it hasn't been answered yet, we would add that question to the FAQ. You, so that it's publicly available to everyone. And then we'd probably send them a response letting them know. This has been added to our FAQ section. As to next steps, just so you're aware, our current contract is set to expire on June 3rd of this year. The renewal costs for this system is currently in the department's 2026 operational budget. And therefore would not specifically require council's approval to renew. The department does currently plan on renewing this service. But as with any service that we utilize, we will continually evaluate the system and its usefulness as a public safety technology. Should we choose to, move away from this system? The contract requirement is that we would need to provide 30 days notice, prior to cancellation. Chris, how long is the renewal for the contract in terms of buying three years? What is typical one year? Yeah, we've been doing one year contracts with them ever since we started. Yes. Yeah, a couple questions. So in the memo, I recall seeing some, statements says that when you compare Flock and Norton with other law enforcement agencies that, three of the ten surveyed agencies require

a case number or a call for service. And, did in that survey, did you find out if that policy was obstructing their ability to investigate? There was no indication that it was obstructing, them in any way. There was nothing in the conversation that led would lead us to believe that it was an obstruction, necessarily. But they have also had that as part of their requirement from the beginning. So they couldn't answer it from the same perspective that we were answering it from. And that being said, I think with our addition of that secondary requirement, it's we will start to see more case numbers and call for service numbers utilized. The we did not specifically ask them, however, how they handle the audit or I'm sorry the alert searches that from our perspective is is the area specifically that would be complicated. Should we require a call for service number or a case number? What do we would require another step. It would require our dispatchers to operate a car that it creates more work. From our perspective that we are currently would like to avoid maybe talk through what an alert, what that would look like. Yeah. So the the alerts or, the system notifying us that a vehicle, with a license plate that has been entered into, CSI, NCIC as a vehicle of interest. So, for example, a vehicle that's wanted by another agency for investigative purposes. What happens now, from a lot of our users is once they get that alert, they look at it, they, take note of the license plate and then they search that

license plate further to see if there have been other hits on our system by that vehicle and otherwise has that vehicle specifically passed other thought cameras? Is there a camera that it passes more frequently than others, all with the intent of giving us a more, defined area to start looking for that specific vehicle versus just the camera that it hit on. It may just be traveling by and as I explained in the, the February meeting, once it passes that camera, we don't know where it it's gone. It, can travel anywhere within our city and essentially never pass another flock camera. So they will look at it for patterns. Or is there a specific area where that vehicle has crossed into our jurisdiction on a regular basis? And therefore, is that being that's because that vehicle belongs in that specific general area within the city and gives us the ability then to drive those areas and see if we can find it. And we have had some successes with that, with stolen vehicles. And I've some stories that have been shared with me. It alert the search that played further behind that it frequencies a general area or passes a camera on a regular basis. And then we've had luck where, officers will drive those streets, in nearby area and have had success in locating and recovering those callers. So in those circumstances specifically, there wouldn't be a call for service number. There would not be, a case report number that currently exists that they could plug in to that specific search. That's partially because the actual investigation belongs to another agency. We're just getting alerted that the vehicles. Yes. Now, would be interested to know how the other three agencies handle that.

We've identified that they do require a case. Number two, to some extent. So is that similar to what you just described or is it a strict policy? If it's a more strict policy, what that tells me is that other agencies have figured out a way to operate with these cameras, while requiring a, a case number or a call for service. And, and in the memo, you mentioned how detrimental that would be. What other agencies are able to do that, then surely there's a way for us to do that as well, which is we need to learn how that process goes. Yeah, I would certainly have to follow up with those agencies and ask some very specific questions, to see how they're utilizing that, to potentially see if there are limitations then or they not using the system to the same degree that we are because of that limitation. But that would require some additional follow up and specific questions. It going to I would like to, you know, request that you do that with we're back to the council because it's very you know, I think I think it's very important to uncover all these stones. Absolutely. We're taking notes of the questions just as an get scale that, thank you for the presentation, as always. You know, it's really important for council that, you guys have been really transparent providing that to us. And getting information about that support. So I have a few questions based on what we've seen so far. How would you characterize what's impact, has it been effective in supporting investigations and public safety outcomes in the area? And do you see any holes currently in the city that need to be filled? Relatively soon?

We do have have a lot of success, with this, with this the use of this system specifically, as you may recall, in the, February meeting, we shared, some of our successes. And I know, on our website, we also include a number of our successes as the, continue to occur. The more recent one that I can think of was the traffic fatality on Huron, not too long ago. I can also recall another, missing endangered adult, success story that we've had. So, yes, very much believe that it has been extremely helpful to us as an agency from a public safety perspective. And yes, if given the opportunity, we have discussed that, we would like to expand the use of this system, specifically, more, deployment of these cameras up north. We have a lot of ingresses that are not covered. And ultimately, our desire from the very beginning with this system was to try to create basically a digital, a barrier, if you where will, to the city of Thornton do allow us another tool to help protect our citizens. So, yes, there are definitely holes, if you will. I believe in our jurisdiction that could utilize the system. Should we have the ability to, expand it? To follow up on Councilman Martinez's question, one of the things that is currently, of ability for our system is that we can do a search without putting the case number in, but based on your audit slide, it looks like that would be considered a red flag when you actually going to do it on again, correct? Yeah. So if somebody selects that they utilize the system for a call for service or a case investigation,

if it does not include one of those numbers, then it is easily identified as a red flag to us and something that would require some additional, follow up. An investigation for, I guess my last question really then, is more towards council. It's, you know, we've we've gotten increased audit trails. We've got no sharing with all the results, our agencies, we've gotten, individual officer tracking to make sure that officers aren't even there. There's no sound detection being done. Are there any concerns that we haven't pressed on to ask for the department? Because I feel like we've checked every box that has been asked of at this point. So a follow up doesn't really seem necessary in my opinion. Chris, you want to respond to that? I know John's presses button, but we'll come back to him for Kristen. Go first. You go back. There is the slide with the chart that was doing a comparison of the different service providers. So really being the most significant or at least noticeable change here would be that for us, the nationwide or the national network. My question around that is why? Or what are some of the more significant benefits to that? What makes it's important and benefit, you know, beneficial to our city because I trust our city. It's like any organization, there's bad actors. So when we open it up nationally, then we just allow or invite, you know, more of those bad actors, and those opportunities don't do much based on some of the initial values and benefits of, you know, where that really benefits the working. Absolutely. So, first, we currently do not utilize the national search as flock intended. We have not checked that box, if you will, for nationwide searching.

We are now, using the system as, a 1 to 1 agency agreement, where the request we would review it. And if we haven't previously revoked them, we can grant them access. We haven't been approving any agencies over the last couple months. Because we obviously wanted to get through this process. So we're not doing we are using the system similar to how we would have to use the system with Motorola and Axon. Versus the statewide. And what use beneficial there is from our perspective. Obviously, every agency within the state of Colorado, has the same laws that apply to it should be following the same guidance, that's been provided from the state level as to how we utilize these systems, or how we should are not allowed to use these systems. So I feel very comfortable with that and allowing states or, I'm sorry, other jurisdictions within the state to conduct a search of a specific license plate that touches our system, not as comfortable from the national perspective. So that's why we don't have that box checked. And we require an agency to specifically reach out to us and ask for permission, to use it, or to share, information back and forth with one another and the ability to search against each other's systems. We have had some successes. And I don't know if I got into these in February or not. We had a situation with a missing, endangered, that ultimately left the state of Colorado and then hit on flock, cameras in Nevada. That helped us lead to being able to make a phone call to an agency and and working through he we noticed that this hit in your jurisdiction, ultimately, that person was recovered,

in that state or located, I should say, in that state. And ultimately, everything checked out was good. And there wasn't the concern that the reporting parties had on the front end in regards to them not being where they thought they should be. But the fact that we were sharing with that agency in another state was helpful in locating that individual. We also had, utilized. This also became extremely helpful, to us with a, individual who we were investigating, and had, good charges on for, sexual assault that occurred in our jurisdiction. The suspect had fled, the state of Colorado. We had no idea, where they had gone. We couldn't find them. Ultimately, that vehicle hit on flock cameras in Florida, and having that information allowed us to kind of focus in on our searches, and we were able to identify, some associates in Florida that the suspect was had ties to. And ultimately, that agency found that suspect and took them into custody on the warrant that we had out for their arrest. There was another one with a homicide out of California, where it was beneficial in giving us an idea as to where to start looking for that suspect. So we have had some successes at the national level with jurisdictions outside of Colorado. It's most certainly not as frequent, however, as it is within the state of Colorado. The majority of our successes very much are within the state of Colorado, neighboring jurisdictions, things of that nature. But we have had those, few success stories outside the state where we felt

that being able to do that is still beneficial. John. Thank you. Excellent presentation. Thank you again. So, about two weeks ago, I had the honor of meeting the city attorney of Aurora up here, Schultz, and in for a conversation about some things and what came up. And, I asked my concerns about data breaches, and he says that flock can be sued by them. So before I ask my question, the basic concern, you know, talking to neighbors, you know, since I've been elected to council concerning block, are the data breaches and the weaponization of block against marginalized communities nationwide, not to mention the increased utilization of surveillance. Right. So I emailed Tansy and Tammy earlier today, and then animals in the string as well. So my question is what liability protections do we have in place as a city if there is a data breach, which is unbeknownst to the city and Thorne PD and if you want to. Sure. The client sorry, you John spot therapy. Thank you. Council member. Yeah. As indicated in our response, the city's, agreement with lock is set forth in the Terms and Conditions document that was signed back in 2023. And that document, among other things, requires flag to carry, an insurance and add the city is an additional insurer. So we would if there was a data breach and there was a lawsuit that followed from that, we would tender our defense to the insurance company as an additional insured. In addition, because we're a governmental agency, subdivision, we have protection under the Colorado Government Immunities Act. And so we would have additional defenses that that flag would not have. So that is that is how I would respond to those that protections. Okay. All right. Thank you. That's all I have. I drew then now motorcycle is forecast to disclose that increases come through for two.

So okay okay. What were the I'm the city and what were the three agencies that require the e-scooters? I don't know them off the top of my head. I'd have to go back and, look in my notes to see which ones. They were specific. I didn't add the specific names of those agencies in the memoran Thanks. Justin, and I just I do want to say thank you for all the hard work that you and your team are putting in. And I know that, I've given you a lot of work with all the questions, and it's, well, you know, it's not just coming from me. It's coming from the people. I represent in Ward one and throughout the whole city, you know, that are coming out. There's many people here. And, and I, I do want to respect their concerns. So, I do thank you for the work. And I think that you have clarified a lot of the questions. The one area where I'm still a bit concerned about is really that we have not provided the venue yet for, the public to come in and, and address the council directly around these issues. And I totally understand that it is not the role of the police department to be in the middle of a policy debate. That's the role of the council. And so my question actually is to our city attorney about what options we have specifically regarding this, upcoming contract renewal. And, to give a venue for our, our residents to come in and, and in a formal and official way to address the council and to allow the council to have an appropriate policy discussion. After hearing the public, how can we do that?

Well, I mean, a decision to have a community meeting on a topic is with council there not any real legal issues? Council can conduct such meetings as it deems appropriate. Are there other venues, like perhaps a public hearing regarding the renewal of the contract that could happen? The renewal of the contract doesn't require or I know it doesn't require one, but if the council asks for one, we could have one. Is that right? Well, also, I think because of the cost, I'm not sure, but I don't think it even comes back to City Council for approval. It's already been appropriated by City Council, the funding for this contract. So, but if council directed us to bring the contract as directed, you know, to have public comment on that agenda item, it could happen. So now we balance my question. Yeah. So if we if we directed that, then we could, we could schedule that and provide that venue in a real official capacity. Sure. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, that's definitely something I'm interested in doing. Because I think that it's only fair to our residents to give them a voice when it comes to these issues. And we've repeatedly had these discussions, but we have not allowed them to speak to us in a way that we do many other decisions that we make. So, you know, and the the basis, the charter, you know, requires council to have certain public meetings. And that's why these meetings typically suffice for giving the public access, both your regular meeting where public comment is allowed and scheduling agenda items at your updates. Yeah. And I would say that, you know, normally that's the case, but we've I think we've had an extraordinary amount of public interest in this particular topic, and it warrants its own agenda item where we can discuss this, in a way. And I think that we certainly has the opportunity as a council to provide that voice.

And I'd love to see that happen. You know, I know we'd be probably hearing the same thing that we've heard here. But the important thing is, is still to create a space, carve out a space specifically for this, for the many, many residents who have reached out asking for this. So, I think that would be a good thing to consider as the council is giving that direction. I think we have the time to do it as well. Mark, Devin, you get your bed next. I'm very confused by that because this isn't a policy. This is a tool. Chief, did we come to you guys and ask you what kind of body camera you should be using and get approval for that? No, sir. This is getting to a redundancy where it just doesn't make any sense in the sense we don't ask the Art city attorney what kind of issues to store the case file. Then we don't ask the city manager what desktop? Database. She's using the store financials in. We leave it at the discretion of our chief and our city manager to make the decisions around the tools that we need to make sure that our safety and, and, and, police departments are able to effectively do their job. We're definitely listening to what the citizens of us, they push back. They've told us that they want audit trails. We have our controls in place now. They don't want sound and video recording. We don't do either one of those things. We have individual officer auditing. I think every box is being checked, has been checked off efficiently and at the request of what the citizens have asked for. I think asking for a meeting around a policy is redundant because this is policy. This is just a tool that we're using in our city. We have Chris and Roberta, so we can follow up to that.

And while I do agree with you in the examples that you're utilizing, what is unique in this situation, this topic is unique. And you'll see, you know, with longer tenure on council, it's very, very rare that we have this much engagement over specific issues. So I think that's what themes or makes this discussion happen more frequent, more redundant is because, you know, we've utilized tools like this for years now, but it wasn't until recent that information came to light and the public engagement started. That. And I'm sure you get emails, but we get a lot of emails about it. So really, I think the purpose or the reasoning behind it is to satisfy the questions, requests and desires of the community. No, they don't care what computers we use or what body cams, but there weren't data issues and things like that that have arisen before. I would I would argue that point. Well to this degree, where it's constantly in the headlines and we're having repetitive meetings discussing it. So, you know, just for my three years on council, you can kind of tell which discussion topics have a lot more presence of the public and inquiries of the public. And that's why we just want to make it more available. Answer the questions, because even since February, you guys have done an excellent job. There were a lot, a lot of questions and a lot of things that they made recommendations to implement. And we're seeing that progress. So I don't want to just close the book and say, hey, it's none of your business. You know, we're going to use whatever tools. I think it's getting better at because of those questions and because of the discussions. And I feel like that's just really important as we sit in these chairs as council member, when the community gets so concerned about something, even though it's not our usual business,

that we do make space for those concerns and hear those questions. So I'm not, not entirely opposed to it, but, a piece that I have really enjoyed is the Community questions and comments, particularly because I'm not the smartest man in this room. I mean, my wife says, I know I'm a know it all. I think aside from her, you know, realistically, I have learned a lot because I don't even know the right questions to ask you or someone in this space. So you have a good base education, and it makes you confident in whatever decisions we make. So, I think that's been beneficial. I think it's been important that, you know, residents that know more have specific questions that I can't even think of. You know, we get those answers and we satisfy it. And at some point, yeah, we can close this book, but it's really just the heightened attention that this has gotten and seeing that it's unlike 99, 98% of the other things that we've discussed on council in my three years. So I don't want to just sweep it under the rug to some degree and say, hey, we've answered the questions, let's just move on. And it's not really something the council usually discusses to this degree, but we're here. We're in the moment to questions community you're asking. So we address it now just because that's what we should do. So and that's that's the big motivation for me personally. You know, I know each of us probably have our own positions or motivations around it, but for me that's been rewarding that lets me sleep better at night, knowing that the council that the residents have peace of mind because they felt heard and got things answered. And for us, it's just facilitating you know, it's I can go time my my points of matters that we've we've had numerous we know this now. We've had community outreach. We have lots of community members who are sitting here now. The questions that have been brought up have been around making sure we're not communicating

with the federal government on immigration, making sure we have audit trails in place, you know, to watch after, make sure it's not being misused, mishandled, concerns about data breaches. And that one to me hits home for all of the two because I feel that way about all of it. But that that goes across all software. But I think that out of every question that this has been posed specifically up until the point of the last meeting that we had, all of those things look like to me from my opinion and some of the others, we've checked those boxes we went through and look for all those. We went through all that data. The team has reevaluated their processes on how they're doing things. I think that we're prolonging something or just trying to keep things moving just because it's a will that we want to keep kind of rolling. But all the questions at this point that have been asked and asked several times in different paraphrase situations have come up with the same responses that, yes, we are taking care of, that. We're monitoring those situations. We're we're changing processes and addressing the concerns that are there. So to me, it just feels like a redundancy to have to try to come back to this again when we don't do this for any other tools, if we start looking at the concerns of privacy and the concerns or things are there, the body cameras, the police officers, we're way more advanced than anything that this camera is doing. But there's there's not a heightened thing around that because as a general principle, the public knows that that's going to be more helpful than hurtful. And by changing our system over from flock to Axon, is it really changing anything other than the name that's on the camera? I wouldn't know, but I, I don't disagree again, entirely with all of your statements. We've made this progress because of those questions and community engagement and the audits and stuff that that all arose because we used this for years without any of that progress being made, because there was no attention to it. So, you know, a big piece for me would be that community meeting. And I know that you guys said that we're inching closer to it,

but if that's the final chapter of the book, then, hey, anybody and everybody that has those questions, this is your last opportunity. Instead of the council fielding these or the emails, you know, perhaps that could be the final chapter then. And it's not, you know, another one of the council discussions, because that is the one thing that I do hear pretty consistent is like, can we have some of that face time and just put a bow tie on any loose ends and questions and then, you know, maybe, maybe at that point that you take on that is they've already said that they gotten zero questions in. Yeah. I didn't even know that was out there, though. I literally my Instagram was uninstalled from my iPhone because I wasn't on there for, I don't know, two weeks or whatever it was. So I know there's a lot of people and maybe it's not to put any, but in individual in a corner, but could be older residents, could be to be idiots like me that just I try to stay off social because I have too much to do each day. So literally my phone uninstalled it for me so I missed it. I know you're doing a great job, and we talked a little at the award ceremony and things. So there's 150,000 plus residents here. There's no way you're reaching it all because I missed that and I tried to do a good job. But we do know we reached 15,000. We got no questions impressions. Yeah, but I mean, those that could be kids. I mean, we're going to move on to the next question, Roberta. Unless and you've also press the buttons. Right. Well, John and I had a meeting a couple weeks ago. More to we had a pretty good list of questions here. Some of them, you know, just looking at, kind of like what we're talking about tonight. And the questions kind of could be grouped up into different and like the same question asked a few different times. But one thing that stood out to me in the meeting was I had just point blank asked a question if folks wanted to just get rid of cameras. And a lot of the people

that have been engaged in this conversation raised their hand to, yes, I want to get rid of the cameras. And then one question that reson comment that was made that resonates with me is people asking if the benefits outweigh the ways, the cost. And so a lot of the conversation wrapped around surveillance and like that being a value people hold and a, concern people have and I have done, you know, a lot of like just over the last few weeks, just kind of searching online and looking at different things and perspectives. And, I found a really cool, by accident, a really cool interview with a really smart lady, tech lady that was talking about the whole idea of surveillance in our country. Now, in the world, and all the different tech companies and all the different ways that we can be surveilled through all the means that we have, which is like our phones, our cars, all these, you know, computers. Everywhere you go, you can be monitored in some way, shape or form and I then again, think about the young man that passed away on Huron and his family and how if this had happened 20 years ago, that family may never know who killed their kid and they may never know, or may never be able to get justice for their child, or missing elderly people, or a missing autistic child that, you know, decides to go in somebody's car. I don't know, there's so many different possibilities. And so I've said this before, I'll say it again. One child's life is worth that to me, because I don't think anybody in the city of Staunton deserts deserves to have their children

lost or stolen and or, you know, trafficked or something. And it's not have a tool to help save them. When it comes to the question around policy, I've looked a lot into that, too. I did a lot of research before when I first got on council about our, procurement process and what that looks like, and this was around the time when we were looking at building a fire station eight and what that looked like. So I sat with Brett Henry for two hours one day and talked about procurement and really got to understand what it's what it means for the city to purchase things like these cameras. And I, having worked in the realm of contract enforcement and policy for a while, when you start to open a can of worms of like, let's do a different procedure for this specific type of policy, you set a precedence and then we'll have to I think it could lead to us having to do that for more and more things. And that's a concern of mine because we have to be able to allow our city workers to do their job and trust and know and believe that they're doing a good job. If we have a serious concern about that, I think we need to bring it to the staff that are working for us and bring it to our city manager via the city manager to the staff to address that. I have a concern when we start to put too much of like this, this whole having a public hearing for this, we don't have that in our charter where we have to do that for every procurement process that we have. And I don't know that that's something that we want to do is change that practice, because, like Council Member Byrd said, it could make it so that we're continuously doing that for other things, too. And there are a lot of tools that our police use

that are frightening. I went through the Citizen's Police Academy, there's tasers, there's guns, there's really big guns. There's guns that shoot beanbags at people. We could see in the United States of America that it would be great if the police didn't have to have guns. But we live in a reality where everybody has a gun in America, and we can't send our police force out there without one. That would be horrifying. So I think that we probably need to look at what they've done as far as the work. And allow them to do that. And if we start to have issues with it, definitely take some steps to correct that. But they've done a lot of work to make sure we have, you know, the correct oversight of this program. I have lived in Thornton for over 30 years. I've seen the work you guys do, and I have not seen anything that leads me to believe that there's somewhere to mistrust anything. Obviously, if that were to change, we can look at it. But that's kind of where I'm at right now. Just to, Yeah, I think actually, I agree with Devin on a lot of points. We have heard this quite a bit. There's not a lot I don't know if there's a whole lot to hear from our police department, but again, we have not provided a venue to hear from the residents. You know, I've heard I've gotten hundreds of emails, contacts. Bynum calls you, as of Lisa, at least 100, conversations. And almost all of them have been, concerned about flaw in and and they don't want it. And I believe there's also hundreds if not thousands of people out there who not these tools out there, but we haven't heard from them either, because we have not

provided them a place to come in and address the council. Sure, they could come in and, talk during meetings, during their public comment, but that that's not the same thing in my opinion. We're not carving out the space, creating it just for them. So if we don't want to do a public hearing with it, we don't need to do it that way. But I think it would be, it would be wrong. We would not be doing our job properly to deny the public out there who have reached out to us over and over and over again, an opportunity to come speak to us directly on this and have in a venue that's specifically designated for this topic. And I think regardless of whether we do this public hearing, which I think it would be the best, the best venue or not, I think we should create that space for that, and not just for the people who are opposed to just our cameras. But I want to hear from people with support. I have not heard from them. They have not reached out to me because we haven't given them the space to do that. And I think if we do that deliberately, then we will have the full picture. We've heard the picture from our staff, we've heard the answer all our questions. We've done a great job. But we've had this, disjointed, ad hoc process of hearing from the public. And I think that that's because we haven't really put the full work in. And I think only after that can we move on from this topic. So that's really what I'm asking for. Was the public hearing or whether it's a community meeting, something has to we have to do that. Otherwise we are we're turning our backs on the public. We're saying, well, we don't need to hear from you directly. Just send us an email. I don't think that's right. And I would I would counter that as well, because the Roberta just said they had a word to many, and this was a topic that came up. We hold meetings with our constituents right? When drew and I had coffee with residents, but didn't come up with the conversations that people were wanting to talk about,

it doesn't mean we didn't give them the opportunity to have that conversation with us. When we set up our meetings to be able to speak with anybody, I welcome any conversation anybody wants to have with me, but if it's not brought up, I don't know that setting a specific meeting with the intent of saying, we're going to speak about this one individual tool is is really necessary when you guys have your meetings set up to be able to run things they have, there's issues going on, but we all have things that are going on where we're speaking with our constituents. But that doesn't mean we're not giving anybody the opportunity to voice their opinion. On top of the fact that every single public comment we have has come up for months now at least the entire time that I've been on council. Yeah, I'm various others. I have not heard overwhelming support for a public hearing, related to the topic for various reasons. I think the direction that staff is moving forward, unless there's an objection to that from anyone, will continue at that process. Recognizing the request for continued community engagement. There's opportunities for your community meetings, board meetings to also have this as a topic. It gives lots of opportunities for that public discourse. I don't think it's going to stop. I think it shouldn't stop it that that's is our job as council members to hear what our constituents have to say in whatever forum. And so I think that's the opportunity. Is there? Anything else to add? All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next item is the McAllister Park. We need a break. And, we need a little bit of time to rotate, snap back into the, I take a push right in. Is looking.

For park draft master plan. So, this is the culmination of a really important to me. Is planning a smart ass enough to, Chris. Thank you. Who's going to make a brief introduction? Good evening. Mayor, mayor Pro Tem Miller and city council members. What we have here is we've got Bob Keyes, deputy director, and then we've got Kendrick Wiseman, our senior project, manager for Parks and Open Space. He's going to he's going to do the bulk of the presentation for this, McAllister Park master plan. So I have that. I will jump out then. Thanks. Well, good evening. Council leaders that I'm an environment project manager with parks, Recreation and Community Programs department. I'm excited to be here tonight to provide you all with an update on the McAllister Park Master planning process. Quick, look at what we're going to be covering this evening. And we'll go ahead and just jump right into things. So I wanted to start off just with a little bit of context here to provide us all a sense of what exactly we're talking about here with McAllister Park. So McAllister Park is about six and a half acres total in size. Sits on the other side of I-25 due less than where we're sitting here tonight at Civic Center. We think it presents, really a unique opportunity over there on I-25. So what makes it a unique opportunity, exactly? Well, first off, the park is already owned by the city. It's really one of the only remaining undeveloped parks left on the west side of I-25. There's also some existing infrastructure of the park, we think road to park, and be very beneficial for the park improvements that we're proposing. This includes a 92 space parking lot that would help support the improvements and also limit the surrounding the impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods as you can. In addition, as you can see on the slide here, McAllister Park is located and surrounded by neighborhoods that have been designated high and very high priority.

Based on the trust for Public Lands Park Prioritization Map tool. This is all to say, basically, that we think there's going to be an outsized impact to the community by expanding and adding additional improvements out of McAllister Park. So I want to take a quick look at the park and kind of its current conditions. So this park and the parcels were purchased by the city back in 2021. There's an existing baseball field, half basketball court, hall, playground for 2 to 5 year old McAllister building, and that's attached to the 92 space parking lot you can see on the west side of the park, which the city owns all the way up to here on street. There's about two and a half acres of undeveloped parkland. You can also see, there's some utilities on the site. We've got some cell phone towers that we're working around. And also an auxiliary, auxiliary structure that's attached to those cell phone towers. It's a gently sloping site and has great views to the south, kind of looking right over downtown Denver all the way to Pike's Peak on a clear day. In fact. So this project really has been driven by public engagement and public process throughout. From the very beginning, we really knew that we wanted to work with the neighborhood and residents to figure out what exactly they wanted to see out of this park. So we started off by attending the Dia de Los Muertos festival back in 2024. That's actually held on site at McAllister. I'm sure plenty of you have been to that event. We did some voting on boards with President Images to figure out what types of park programing residents would like to see out there. We followed that up by developing as a design team two conceptual site plans that we then presented through, online bilingual survey and also another in-person meeting held at the park, where we had some good attendance. We followed that up finally, earlier this year by reviewing the draft master plan. That was, kind of a, a combination of all the feedback we had received up to that point.

Presented that draft master plan to the neighborhood just earlier this year in February. Some of the key takeaways from the public engagement process. We really felt like we had a good mix of park users across lots of different age groups, which was great to see. It wasn't just young or old, it was kind of everything. We also found that there's a lot of similar top amenities that residents were requesting across the different engagements. You can see the top amenities that were, ranked the highest there on the screen. There was a bit of a preference for the second concept that was presented, and there was no majority in favor of replacing the baseball field, that it just was a multi-use field. So let's take a look at the draft master plan. As you can see on the screen there on the east side of the park, we're really leaving in place all of the existing park infrastructure. So the baseball field, basketball court, playground, all that stays in place, likely with some minor enhancements and improvements. So talk about some of the highlights of the proposed improvements. Looking at the building, we've specifically left about a 50ft buffer around the building on all sides and more to the west side of the building in case of any future renovations or expansion of that facility. There's a small splash pad there in the center of the park, kind of designated with that swirl. That that splash pad is shown at about half the size of the existing one that's out at Carpenter Park. To give you a sense of the size, that area is also being designed to double as an outdoor classroom or small amphitheater. When the water shut off for the season to the west of that splash pad, we have an expanded playground area. It's playground area really focuses on, bouldering type equipment and nature based play equipment. We have increased shade across the site using both tree plantings and also a shade shelter there at the plaza space just to the south of the splash pad, we've got multiple accessible concrete walking loops throughout the park. We've added some nature exploration, soft

service trails, park games and water wise plantings. Spread around the perimeter. We've really tried to limit bluegrass on this design obviously is pretty thirsty stuff, so we really wanted to limit it to the most usable spaces. You can see that highlighted towards the south side of that new proposed development. We've also reserved a prominent location close to Huron Street for public art, and we hope to work with a local artist on that project. Additional enhancements, which aren't all that visible or shown on the plan include some lighting, seating, and a split rail fence that's going to run the full length along Huron Street to separate the park area from the busy street. We're also looking at the potential to put a couple food truck hookups in the parking lot to support any community events that might happen at the park. One thing I want to point out, this particular plan, does not include a planned restroom, which is pretty typical for a park of this size. There's obviously a significant cost of those, both upfront and ongoing maintenance or a maintenance perspective. And really we focus those typically on regional size parks and athletic facilities that are hosting large tournaments. We would be open to exploring a shared bathroom with the build, building, if that were ever to be renovated. And, in a way that would provide that as an opportunity. We also plan to add an additional part of that in the meantime, to help with the additional usage that we anticipate. Go back to that one role that, the design team has also put together a conservative cost estimate at this point. This includes a 20% contingency. And as you can see on the screen there, the proposed improvements are coming in a total of somewhere between 3.9 and $4.6 million. Parks Department feels like this project is really well oriented to go after grants for, and we feel pretty optimistic that we could offset total cost to the tune of about 40 to 50% for this. For these costs. Some character images here on the screen give you a sense of kind of what we're thinking about from a material palette standpoint. So throughout the public

engagement process, we heard a lot of folks and they would love to have more natural materials, more local materials and parks if possible. So we've really focused in on those. We also want to make sure that we're using water wise and low water use, water features in the splash pad so you can kind of picture misters, things on timers, things with buttons, things that aren't necessarily running unless someone is actively using them. This is really gonna allow park visitors to cool off in the hot summer months without wasting that precious resource. We're also looking at the potential, to reuse the water that comes out on the splash pad for irrigation throughout the park, and then the rest of it is just kind of look at that high quality, multi-generational type site furnishings for the rest of the park and for comfort of the visitors. Project timeline here. So we're here in spring 2026 presenting to you all. We anticipate to take the feedback from this meeting, refine it into master plan that we just presented. We will continue, like I said, to go after grant dollars for the remainder of this year. And we are also we have earmarked dollars already set aside for construction documents will be moving into that next once we have a final draft master plan. So like I said, we do feel like this is a very highly competitive project for grant dollars. So we'll be looking at lots of different opportunities for that. We're also going to be continuing to work with our partners in the budget office and other city departments to prioritize this project within the greater CIP process for the citywide and other projects. Once funding has been secured, we'll move right into construction. That's all I've got for you. So happy to take any comments that you might have or questions and, appreciate your time. Kevin. Couple of questions. First, thanks for this. I think this is a great addition to the city. I think that area really needs something like this to kind of help boost up, the liveliness of the city

and kind of give opportunity to areas around there that doesn't have this kind of nice parks. So I think this is great. I would like to know, do we know what the added cost to the parks budget to maintain the park, if that's going to be increased at all? And what kind of difference we're looking at as far as that? The funding for that, how is how is that going to be aligned with the expiration of the, the sales tax? It will be expiring about the same time this things should be finishing up, construction around the same time. And then we have like a levy that's in place currently that helps fund a lot of our parks for on sales tax and how that aligns that with funding. And then two more is one is one of the slides mentioned that there's no plum public restrooms, and you mentioned that they could be sharing with the building. Could we look at what that would cost to actually do an outdoor bathroom in addition to that as well, for the citizens, be able to use water at the park? I think that would be a really nice added benefit for, you know, the kids playing baseball stuff at the park and things that were going on. Within the last question, you mentioned the food truck hookups. I'm assuming there's 50 amp hookups would be running there. Or we're planning to make sure we keep those locked as well. So that's my reason to study a charger Tesla on it whenever they get bored. So first question, you had talk. Well, let me work backwards. The plumbed restrooms. We have looked into the cost of those restrooms. And it really depends on the size and capacity. Most of the plum restrooms, as Kendrick had mentioned, we reserved for larger kind of regional parks, or sports facilities that we are hosting large tournaments. This park, although it's a it's an incredible, development that that master plan would bring to it. So you just don't feel like it rises to that level, of plumbed restrooms, those, you know, a variety of,

of a variety of restroom options could be available besides plumbed restrooms. That's kind of an upgrade to the standard portal that you might see out there, right? Like vault toilets. There's a lot of those options that are, pretty economical. And those those would help us to reduce some of the maintenance costs. And that maintenance burden on a plumbed restroom facilities. A lot of our plumbed restroom facilities just, that they get a lot of wear. So, we're looking at something that could provide a little more durability. Right. And I think those vault toilets, are an option, and those are anywhere from about 175,000 to 500,000, depending on the side, and what kind of site prep that you need. Also. So so that's an option. The, the question about the, hookups. Absolutely. Those would be secured and locked, when not in use for, a vendor. The question regarding the maintenance, it's it's negligible maintenance. Right now we're out there, you know, we have a parks worker that's assigned to that location, among other locations, but, but he's there, you know, a couple times a week would increase his frequency in the trash. Yes, but it's a negligible impact of that operational budget. We feel like we could cover it with our existing resources and not have to detract from somewhere else, or some of the other the open space tax or the open space tax. You know, is that a is that a potential that we, that, that open space tax goes away? Yeah. I don't I don't find it that likely. It's a super popular program that, that all the residents of Adams County support. You know, and I think there's been some discussions about extending that tax into perpetuity. I don't know where that's at.

I'd have to check with our partners at Adams County and see, but definitely if that if that tax went away, would it have an impact? Right. We are allowed 20% of our tax to go towards maintenance. So that's what the, our operations side would, would be looking to try to find a way to recover in other ways. That 20% loss from that tax, the majority of that tax, that the city gets goes to our capital improvement projects. All right. Yeah. I mean, the the reason why I ask about the restrooms, too, since there's already an existing building. I didn't know if there was a way to just tie in to the plumbing and stuff that was there. Make it easier. There definitely is. But I think the next presentation that we have with the, the feasibility study might, might speak to that, but we would definitely consider finding a way you look if, if, if the residents and, and you all really said, hey, look, this part deserves a pump restroom. We'll figure it out. Thank you. All right, I have Justin, and then Roberta van drew. Thank you for the presentation. It's really nice to see such a cool project coming up here on the West side with one. You mentioned the grants that you identified that coming up this summer. What's do you have an idea of, like, are you sources of funding, like federal the you know, what kind of grants are you targeting? Yeah, specifically, we're looking at three different grants for this project. So the first one is with our great, partners over at HeadCount in the open space, of course, that we work with oftentimes. So that's, that's a great program that we can look at and feel very confident that we could get dollars. With that partnership, we're also going to be looking because this project, is well situated for it at go, go dollars, which is, state funded program through lottery dollars. We've had some success with them in the past. They're pretty competitive. But we do feel like this

project really rises, and aligns well with a lot of what they're looking for. And then finally, there's another grant through Dola, which is the Department of Local Affairs at the state level, once again funded primarily with gas and oil, dollars and and goes back into communities where there's been extractive processes and Adams County actually scores pretty high for those processes. So we also feel like we would rate very well for those grants. So those are the three that we have in mind. And we feel very confident that, really Adams County, very likely. And then the other two, maybe there's, you know, 30% chance of either one of those coming. Okay. Or any of those grants, like the I guess, are the features of the park dependent on, like, some of the grants that you're going after? Like, for example, we you we talked through this and, we talked previously about the Moscow lighting grant that was out there for the soccer field. No longer an option anymore, but like grants and other similar things where they're tied to specific features, is that something that you would consider is that something that the grants that you're talking about, you know, are connected to the design of the park? None of those, three particular grants are, tied to any specific aspect of this, of this park. They're all go they all go towards supporting, green spaces in General Park, redevelopment. Acquisitions, open space in some cases, but aren't tied to specific elements. Nor are there huge restrictions with any of those, how we can use those dollars? I think we'd be open to, to grants that maybe had a more specific use, for this one, you know, maybe the most unique feature being the splash pad. But we could certainly look, if there's any grants out there that exist to help support communities get splash pads. This is a bit of, a bit of a splash pad desert, if you will. So really, if you look at, you know, outside of Water Road, which is a different experience because it's not, public and free to access, there's really not another splash pad

for about three and a half miles in any direction. And those are both on the other side. I 25 so hard to get to for a lot of folks on the West Side. So I think that definitely, an opportunity would be optimal. Absolutely. My last comment is just whenever, you know, we end up deciding on restrooms, let's just say that it's very important we have at least a portal or something like that, like we have a skate park that we, you know, just to Devin's point makes making sure that that is that maintenance budget is proper for that, because, you know, I mean, we've had problems with the poor LED lighting, lots of serious problems, the Portland skate park, and I think, you know, making sure we have enough maintenance budget for that is important. Even if we can't do, restrooms or whatever. We got to have some kind of restroom there. Absolutely. That's it. The park does have, portal it out there for most of the season currently, so we'd be adding one. I don't know if you've had any, vandalism concerns we have at that at that location. It's it it stays pretty protected where it's at. And and we would anticipate the same, but I don't see it as an that we would make sure we're sure we're not vandalism, you know dead bodies. We're concerned about those. But. Thanks, Roberta. Yeah. Good job. So I was just wondering about, you said something. What was the electrical thing you were asking about? Like 50 becomes what, the 50 and Pokemon. Oh, okay. So that's for city. Now, it would likely be to help support food trucks that may want to come out there for community events. Obviously we have Dia de Los Muertos, so we have some vendors out there. So the idea has come up, because we have the parking lot once again that provides that off street parking. If we can make that a little bit easier for them to to be there, maybe not necessarily for that particular event, but for other ones that could be held at the park once it's improved. Just to make it a little bit more of a draw for those types of businesses,

I was wondering if there would be electric charging stations at this new at this park, because there's a parking lot. Yeah, that's a good question. We haven't necessarily looked at that because we're not, redeveloping the parking lot itself. It hasn't been something that we've focused on, but certainly could explore that option to add a couple, because there's I know the next parts about the buildings. There's. Yeah. And that that may have gotten touched on in the feasibility report. I'm not certain. But we can certainly look at that. Just any opportunity we can have to build that infrastructure with new buildings, that would probably be worth us looking at doing that while we're doing it, rather than trying to add it later. So and I feel like as electric car owner, I just feel like city buildings are always like the most trustworthy places to charge. Unfortunately, sometimes you go to like some of these other places. I mean, they're charging stations are kind of lean, but they're are always really good in other cities. I've been to have good ones that they're great centers in parks. So just something to think about with this redevelopment of this, facility. And that might be an opportunity for some of those grant specific, programs, said Councilmember Martinez. Had mentioned that maybe that, that's something that we could look into. Yeah. If we can explore it just because it's another opportunity and, I think, you know, they're not going anywhere. Definitely getting to be more popular these days, for obvious reasons. Joe, beautiful park. Thanks for the presentation. A couple questions. The property immediately to the west. I'm just looking at Google Maps right now. It looks like it's just an empty lot with maybe a house. Do you know what the plans are for that property? If there are any? It's owned by a development company. I don't know the name off the top of my head. I haven't seen any, distinct plans for that property as of yet. I believe it's somewhat recent that they purchased that. But it is owned by by a private company,

and I think they have plans to develop it somewhere down the road. We could certainly look into that. Okay, well, just curious, looking at kind of just like the density around that park. And, one of the concerns, maybe we can look at when I'm sure you're working with traffic and all that, but we didn't talk about it in the master plan is what is is there going to be a more substantial crossing built across Huron that will connect the neighborhood to the west, and then the potential development that'll be there on that vacant lot? There's a similar things are similar crossing just north on Huron because in North Glen, Park, just North 104th and there's like, kind of a blighted crossing and it goes to there that little pond that they after the walk around. Yeah. Is that something that's already in the works that you expect for Huron? Yes. We've we've had the initial conversations with the traffic department. There's not currently, a light at that intersection of 96th Avenue. There is a fire station there as well. That does have a traffic signal there just to the north on Huron. But absolutely. Yeah, we're looking at all those options to improve safety, to get folks from the west side of Huron over to this park, because, yeah, as you mentioned, a lot of the, certain specific residents are over on that West side, and we'd like to encourage them to be able to walk to the park. It's great that we have the parking lot and they can drive there. We want to make that as safe as possible. So, you know, likely for a roadway of that size and speed, we would want to have, a signal to intersection to make that as safe as possible and potentially even talk about median islands. But that's yeah, we've started that discussion and haven't necessarily included that as part of this project scope that make sense. And, you know, when you when you kind of look at natural walkways or how people move from one area to the other, that'd be it'd be interesting to see how that study plays out, because you might put the intersection at 96 or at the cross or at the fire station, but there might be kind of just immediate lateral movement across your own, which you're not accomplishing the safety. The safety mission there. So, yeah, there's something to that. Look,

I just want to point out the other question on, you know, obviously, the drought stage with the splash pad and thinking about the the future or is there new technology coming out? I don't know much about splash pads that, you know, reuses the water. So you're not having it resupplied constantly. And, you know, it's not often drought stage two or whatever comes next I know. Yeah, absolutely. There's there's kind of three basic levels of water treatment you can have at a splash pad like this. So the first one is just a pass through system. That would be water comes through. It goes through the features, goes into the drain and goes into the into the sewer system. Right. We'd like to avoid that if at all possible and use that resource a little bit more wisely. Once again, I think the features play into that a lot. So having, you know, features that are constantly a fountain and spraying water up in the air all the time, you lose water through that process and also through evapotranspiration. So we'd like to avoid that with the features. The second treatment system, is the one that I mentioned where you have water come out through the features, go into a drain into a system, and then that can be used to irrigate the park. So that's kind of you at least you get two uses out of that water or goes back into the groundwater table. And then the third system is a recirculating system. They're they are obviously more expensive. There's a lot of different technology from everything from UV to filters. The carpenter splash pad is an example of a recirculating system. It comes with, more cost upfront, and more cost to maintain, obviously, because those pump systems are pretty, pretty elaborate. So we're looking at all of our options. We felt like the, second option where we use reuse that water if possible for irrigation kind, found a happy middle ground. But, absolutely. There are recirculating systems, as you know, for a system of this size. I think we're talking about adding on about three quarters of $1 million to $1 million. For that system upfront. So it does increase the cost pretty quickly. But it saves water, right? So it uses water a lot more efficiently, which is we also pay for that. So there's cost associated with all those decisions. You. Yeah.

Other questions. Any objection to the plan? Let's talk about the other stuff. The next phase. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. All. Right. So we're going to stay in the same location, but now shift to a different topic. So, we've got Sean Sadler and Rob Kolstad coming from. So, terms of some background as they get seated, this is about the council request. When we moved our winter weather. Gear facility to McAllister, there was, requests to look at if it was practical to also move our community connection staff that is currently off of Dorothy, over to this facility. And so, we did engage a third party contractor and, we'll share some of the findings from that review. Thanks for the introduction. So tonight, we're going to just cover a little bit of background information. Actually, the, park master plan covered a little bit of it for us. So we thank them for that. Do plan on talking a little bit about the feasibility study. The full report is in your packet. We don't plan on spending much time talking about the conceptual floor plans or anything like that. They they are conceptual at this point. We're happy to answer any questions at this point. From our standpoint, this was more a test of whether this was feasible or not. And what are the kind of the trade offs of potentially doing this. So again, happy to answer any questions, but don't we don't plan on spending a lot of time on, office layouts and that kind of thing. And then we wanted to finish with a discussion of next steps and loop back to kind of the policy goals. As Tansy said, this discussion came up in the context of, the warming center moving the warming center operations over to, the McAllister center.

We thought there might be some other policy goals that may be important to you and may lead us down a certain path. And so we did want to, maybe have a little discussion about that. So that's the plan for tonight. So just, a little bit of background as, as you remember, this came up, in the context of the warming center, a little bit of history about the McAllister center, as you probably where it was. It was an old church that the city acquired in, 2021. And at the point we acquired it, it was really about preserving access to that park. You know, we knew that the property was bigger and that it had future potential and that there was this building. But at the time, it was really about preserving access to that park and, an amenity, a current amenity and the potential for a future amenity on the west side of I-25. In 2022, many of you remember, the city, entertained, or entered into an agreement with the community band and the, community chorus. They use, as I'm sure many of you are using McAllister as a practice facility and occasionally for performances. Although the band is a little limited, I don't think they can use it for their full performance because of the size of the band. But anyways, it is. It does get used in this important facility to them, and we'll come back to that here in a minute. In 2024, we conducted kind of a similar feasibility study about adding on to the building, more, more on lines of a, performing arts concept. And so, we did tax the feasibility of that and figured that, or the, the results of that, assessment basically said that it could be done, but there would need to be a significant expansion to create a performance space that would be adequate or beyond what we already have. And as you're well aware, in 2025, for the 2025 and 2026 winter, we started warming operations, in McAllister. And this winter has been, a particularly mild winter. We have activated it. And so we've gotten it tested facility, but I don't think test it,

kind of the limits of a potentially a worse winter than we, we've had. And then we, as you just heard, we wrapped up this year are in the process of wrapping up the master plan for the park. So at this point, I'm going to I should, mention Mark Bowers with Architectural Workshop is here. His firm helped us put together the feasibility studies here to answer any questions. They were the ones that also worked on the performing arts, conceptual design. And we're able to leverage a lot of the building assessment that was done as part of that assessment and really just wrapped into this work so that I'm going to turn it over again. Reynolds Sean, the interim management service director, who's, I'm on the project. So as, Rob mentioned, you know, we hired an architectural workshop workshop previously worked on the, the performing Arts center visibility study. They their their mission, their scope was to evaluate the facility, to be repurposed, to provide office space to the community connections, code compliance and for the, permanent winter weather warming center operation, which, of course, just completed its first, first season of operations. Architectural Workshop interviewed, our key personnel from from those various groups, to assess their operational, spatial and functional needs. They then reviewed the current state of the facilities capacity to meet the identified needs. That began with a site assessment, including, the current utility services, and parking capacity. They also evaluated the building structure and its existing systems, layout and accessibility from those assessments, Architectural Workshop developed two conceptual plans to assess how the needs of those operations could fit and coexist within the building, with the base assumption that any reconfiguration would need to fit within the existing building footprint.

So, as Rob mentioned, I'm not going to dive too much into the details of the, the, specific layout. Either one of these concepts, they're really these are both really intended to just demonstrate the plausibility of the concept, and both would require a lot of additional consideration, refinement and design effort if if a decision was made to move toward, That said, concept examines how the warming center, community connections and code compliance might all fit, within that space. This concept, is centered around a large multi-purpose room that can be used to accommodate up to 20 people during, warming center operations while also serving as a large meeting room when not needed as a warming center. Around that, there's a reception area that can double as a warming center intake. Private office spaces, storage, Ada compliant restrooms, and other, typical amenities that you would see in a facility like this in the basement. The concept also includes, a large open concept work area that provides adequate workspace for all of code compliance and community connections. Current staff, a couple more private offices, a small break room and some additional storage. The concept, offers a very efficient use of space and is expected to allow better collaboration between the code compliance and community action teams. But it also has some limitations. Notably, this concept is is essentially maxed out and and does not offer much opportunity for growth. In addition, some of the community connections, events and community programs, may need to be hosted offsite at other facilities due to the space constraints. Finally, this space will not accommodate the needs of the band or choir,

that currently utilize the McAllister facility. It's concept B, examines the suitability of moving only community connections to McAllister facility. This concept is very similar in many ways, but has a larger multi-purpose room, with a capacity of 24. More. Private office space, more storage, more meeting rooms, and a less crowded shared workspace. This less dense concept, would likely be a bit more comfortable for staff, allows more opportunity for growth, and offers a bit more room for warming center operations. However, it does not accommodate it still does not accommodate, for the band or the choir and, and, you know, also, the anticipated cost is really only a small bit, less than the prior concept. So again, I mentioned, you know, the policy goals and wanting to have a little bit of discussion around that. Obviously when this came up, it was in the context of Co-locating, what I well, what I interpreted was it was and came up in the context of Co-locating, the homeless outreach team and community connections with warming center operations. But we thought there might be other considerations. You know, I don't that the visibility of community connections and at the facilities that now is kind of tucked in a neighborhood, you know, this is out on more of an arterial, you know, could that be benefit? Enhancing city presence west of I-25. We talked about the park not having a lot of assets west of I-25. This could be another, you know, viewed as a potentially community asset. That would be on the, on the west side of the highway. Just more broadly location and access to transit, you know, I can't remember. I think there's a bus line on Huron Street. And so, you know, a little bit, a little bit better access to transit. We talked about this in services. You know, access to services is relative,

but this probably has better access to services relative to the current community. Connections, location. You know, one of the other considerations that we certainly have talked about is the benefit of, you know, a future community programs department that has both kind of the community connections operations and code compliance, you know, some benefit of co-locating those groups together and creating kind of one, one space shot that this space would be tight for them. And then, the potential kind of on the corollary is if you, if you were to do this, you know, the benefit of creating kind of consolidated arts, culture, history, type of, programing centered around taxi, the fire museum and then, you know, whatever ends up being backfilled with the existing, community Connections facility. So, those are some of the, policy goals. I'll come back to this. I did want to just highlight some, some considerations that we're certainly thinking about, as we move forward. One is capital costs. I mean, you know, you're talking 3 to 4 million. How does that compete against some of your other priorities? Service relocation is another one that not over not something that can't be overcome. But people get used to getting services, a certain location that would need to be a thoughtful transition to, to making sure that we communicate with the with the community. Sean mentioned a big one programing space. You know, there some some of, the events that community connections hold would be, challenging to, a whole host at this facility. And so you'd have to come up with an alternative plan at a different location or something like that. In the city, backfilling the community connections, facility that is a larger, facility if you include the basement. And so the the broader plan of that, that building and what we would do with that, and then the community band and the community chorus, they, when we, we met with them when we, started the warming center operation over McAllister to kind of work out some of the,

the, the challenges of working around them and making sure they could still use the facility. And so they they immediately asked they they knew that this was under consideration. I immediately asked about, you know, here we can kicked out probably I said, or just all we were asked to do is look at this and determine the feasibility. So they're generally aware of it and certainly have interest in what we end up doing. We have not communicated with them really about the results of this or what the plan is, because we don't really know. But we would want to. You know, follow up with them and make sure that they feel like we're we're communicating with them and they're in the know what's happening. So those are a few of the policy goals. I'm sure there are others. So, this is our last slide. Just kind of wanted to wrap it up. So discussion and next steps. We thought those policy goals might help, guide the discussion, but there there certainly are. We identified five options. I'm sure there are others. But, you know, pursue concept A that that's the community connections code and a warming center and and incorporate that in the 2027 budget. And see where where it lands from a priority standpoint from you all, similarly pursue concept B, which is just community connections in the warming center. A third option could be to, consider consolidating this idea of a consolidated community, programs department. Look at consolidating that into the current community connections facility and into where they are now or, or some alternative location. And then option for is, we said explore a purpose built community programs or department facility. McAllister. So that's the concept. And this is really rough at this point. But the you basically would say don't leverage the existing building or don't don't look at renovating, look at kind of a built to scratch or build from scratch building. And we'd rough back of the napkin that was in the $4.5 million range. Just just at a real high level. Some don't quote me on that number, but from an order of magnitude, that's what we were. We were thinking just from a planning purpose at this stage. And then obviously five is to do nothing.

So, happy to take any questions, but I'm going to I'm going to pull back to these policy goals and turn it over to you all right. I have Devin, then Roberta, and then Jerome. The bullet point 2 to 3.4, depending on which one of the concepts, we would sort of go on through those two. That's in addition to the 3.9 to the 4.6 for the actual park itself. Yes, correct. These are separate. We're looking at an all in of 8 million for the entire park building, everything to be. But there's only one. And I know you said you haven't reached out to the band to discuss anything about relocation ideas. Should we decide to go through this process? Do we have an idea if there are any facilities that we could use to help reestablish the band so that they can relocate somewhere else? Yeah, that'd be again, depending on council's direction. That would be our preference is to talk with them about their needs, and what we potentially have that could work. And, and what, what we can obviously if, if you are vacating the current community connections building, that's a potential that right off the bat, that that we had talked about, I think our initial discussions with the band is that that would be a chat. You know, there's the community room used to be to where we do senior launches. I think that would be a challenge for them. That might possibly work. But anyway, so the the short answer, your question is that would be something that we'd want to explore with, mobility or depending on council's direction. Yeah. I mean, I mean, the band's been around for a very long time. I would hate for us to be like, hey, you're out. And by the way, I mean, we're to figure figured out. But I have the same question about the band in the choir. And then, I, I know there's not like, a lot of details about the floor layout quite yet, but I was wondering, like, I know that there's, like, the commute or the, computer.

Lab in the basement. Would there be space for, like, technology for people to use in the new building or. I, I don't think either of the designs concept B we might be able to come accommodate it, but but I don't know, probably not concept A, I don't think I'm wondering how often it's used because when I visited there, it's not like I know there's things for people to check out, like iPad and you don't need to have, like if it's like laptops and iPads, you don't need to have like a computer lab set up. Yeah, I think that'd be again, if council wanted to pursue this, that'd be something that we need to look at in the design and figure out the you know, we know they'll be even at this conceptual level. We know there'll be trade offs between what we have right now and what we what we ultimately want. And I think that'd be part of what the design process would need to work through is, okay, what are those trade offs? What's more important? Is it important to have this computer lab that you know, gets whatever use it gets? Or is it more important to have this, this event room or this meeting room or whatever for the for purposes of the design? And as far as, like usage of community connections, what does that look like on a day to day basis? Because I don't get to go there like every day. Yeah, I know that it can depend on the events. I think they get a high usage when they're hosting an event. I'm not. I don't get the sense of how much foot traffic they have, but we can, provide some follow up information on that. Okay. That's all I have right now. Yeah. Yeah, just a couple questions. As far as the users of community connections, if we're looking at moving it to the west side of 25, is there data around like, you know, the users of that or the visitors, the community connections? They all live on the west side of 25. So it makes more sense, from a usability, standpoint, is there any knowledge or info that we can look into? Not that I'm aware, but we can ask. I, you know, I think for certain clientele, because they get entered into a

database or different databases, we may have that, but I'm not sure what how good of data will have for events that they host or whatever. So we can ask. I'm just not sure what we'll be able to get out of that yet. And again, it's like if if we're moving to the West side becomes more difficult to access those services, then, you know, that should be a consideration around the sounds. As far as, I would agree with like the mentioned in the, in the community, chorus, you know, they're pretty integral part of the community. And of course, we want to value and and make sure arts and culture is important, in music. So I would, I would not want to move forward with anything until like there was actual plan that said, we know they're going to this and they're okay with it. And then and then they can begin to transition before, the next transition. So I think for them, especially during like a season when they're in this kind of middle of, you know, this weird transition that you would be and that could affect their schedule and things like that. And then I guess I really don't feel like, what do we hear from code compliance in Nashville? Hot team. No. Is it a or better looking to be in that spot. You know do they do they not like their permanent space. You know info or feedback that's really kind of pressing. Or that's, that's pushing them to want to go into a different space. Well, yeah. I mean, the direction came from council to, to look at this so that they certainly weren't the driving force behind it. They were engaged the stakeholders to the interview process. And and we got feedback on a draft of this. And, you know, if I could, I, I think from, from community connections, probably the thing that they highlighted the most for us is the, the ability to do programing in the space and the space limitations of the programing. And, and then having to, you know, relocate and reestablish

a presence in the community, from code compliance there. There's, main point of feedback was making sure that the building is secure from an access standpoint and that there's, there's, provisions and considerations for, staff safety and security. They've got, suggest, which I don't know, what is Colorado Justice Information system? Criminal, criminal, criminal justice error. Sensitive data that we need to make sure that is protected, accordingly. So, hopefully that answers your question. It does? Yeah. Thank you. I have Justin and Kristen Cherish with this project. B, you know, it's been funded by the Parks and Open Space Fund. But the other presentation is. And that's what I thought. And, you know, given the options we have, you know, it seems I feel like there might be some, like, are there other options in terms of, like, not letting this plan just disappear and be forgotten, but also not putting that in the pipeline of 2027 budget? Like, how could this be spread out over a longer time horizon? And that's also, you know, payment agreeing with drew here on that, not having a place in mind for that and in the chorus, yeah. You know, I think there's just a lot to consider. I'm not sure. And it's 20, 27 is the end all we all so what what can we do that to keep this going but not force it on the 2027 of it? Yeah, I think that's, subject to your direction. You know, off the top of my head, we could advance some additional design. Design concepts if we wanted to. We could, based on council's direction, fully engage with the choir and band to look at alternatives

for, for their programing needs. So those are a couple of things that we could do in the interim. I would think. No. And the only thing and just to be clear, when we talk about the 2027 budget process, I don't know that we actually meant that that would be show up in the CIP in 2027. So, so for the for the public, I think council, we, we, we develop a five year capital plan. And so, I think, ultimately knowing if this is something you want us to start considering in terms of that long term view, I don't I don't know that we necessarily meant that it would necessarily, we, we plan to be, added to the, the first year of the capital plan. But in that, in that 2027 capital planning process. Okay. Yeah, that makes a lot more sense. Pointing out like a five year schedule and see how it lines up with the long term right versus throw it in there in 2027. Think Chris compliance is currently here correct? Correct. So but there are curveball concepts. Mess this up a little bit. What if there was this concept C where it was just code going over to that building. So the build out isn't so robust. Community connections needing a little bit more space for some of their programing. But was that ever discussed of then you would have more space for the band? Should it be them? And it's just code that goes there for the office space. Is that a possibility? Was that ever discussed? We did not discuss that or reall And I guess my again, my understanding of going back to the policy goals, kind of the core, the the essential question of this is co-location of warming center

operations and, the connections or homeless outreach team at at McAllister. So, no, we didn't we didn't consider that. And whether it's possible or the trade offs, I would want to off the cuff, I'd have to think about I we people smarter than me would have to think about that. Yeah. Maybe that's just a compromise. And then there's not as much office and the band could stay there. But we can shift some personnel over there instead of the larger personnel. You know, connections. But again, trying to combine those. Search, what is a bus stop currently? Closest to community connections. We talked about this was it was a one off I finger. I thought, I don't I'm sorry, Councilman Salazar, I don't remember. I, I thought it was about a half to three quarter of a mile walk. That's some reason why I wanted this route. Was because this bus stop, that's at least rotation. All you have to do is walk across the field, which eventually will be a part. And, you know, I think that sometimes we're losing a lot of interest over the other one because people can't make it that easy. I mean, do we have any kind of, data on that, that complaints people are not going to that vicinity because it's not accessible to all of us now? Not that I'm aware of, but we can ask. And another thing, have we reached out into any of the, stakeholders like community reach that, would they feel that that would be a great place for this new facility? Route, reach to community Reach to see if that what they think about this location. And so I think that, I mean, honestly, most of the community reaches on that side by 25 anyway. Right? So that would, you know, bring a more wholesome location

for everything to be. So just to be clear, the interest is whether they, they would think any connections relocating would be a positive thing. Is that the question? We we can certainly do engagement again. This is first step of us just providing the information that the council had asked for. So in terms of next steps of process or decision making, I think that was partially the intent of this slide is to make it, we can help design a process to evaluate this, but to some degree, I think it would be helpful to understand a little bit more what are the policy goals that we're evaluating those, that feedback or those things against? Certain. I feel like when we first originally have this conversation, it was around, putting like having the wraparound services for the warming center because the rec center, is a rec center and people are going there to be warm, but we had no other services for folks to get connected with things. Nothing there that would help them with other things in life. And that was kind of the intent. So I would be in favor of originally I thought a but, I think probably be, and I think, well, I like the idea of. Code and community connections being together. I can see how it would be cramped and that would, you know, the building isn't. I'm very familiar with the building. Spent a lot of time there with Dia de Los Muertos. So I could see how that would be kind of cramped. And we wanted to make sure that this has, you know, accessibility to resources for people that need it. That was kind of the whole idea of it.

I also grew up just down the street from the old or what's now the Kennedy Community Connections and, bus service. That area has drastically declined. When I was a kid, I used to take the bus a lot of places, and you can't really do that much from that neighborhood anymore. Being, as you just said, it was an, you know, a huge, more alternative road, with Huron being there and everything with McAllister, I think that I guess the thing is, is if we look at budgets as moral documents, we've discussed how important it is to serve the homeless in Thornton. And, whether it's homeless or people that are just struggling and eating services. And I think that we need to prioritize putting the resources into this building and making the program, just more, more robust through intentional, and intentional capital project or, you know, re construction in this area. All due respect to the band and the choir, my son used to be on the band. I dropped him off so many times to play. I love the band, but I know that we have space in other places for them to play, and I know that the city will do their due diligence to make sure they have that space. They are their own 500 1C3, so it's not like they're owned by the city or anything. They have the name Thornton Community Band, but they are their own 500 1C3 and have the ability to do fundraising and get funds through CFD and all that stuff. I've been to the award ceremonies where they've gotten that. So, we do have a memo with them. I think we could easily, with the support of staff, find another place for them to store their equipment and practice. And I think the original intent with this was to put most of the arts over in the Eppinger original Thornton neighborhood, and have McAllister be more of a hub for

the community connections needs. So, I'm in, support of option B because I think this is an appropriate way for the city of Thornton to be a part of having solutions to issues that affect unhoused people and people that are struggling with, food stability and, housing issues. So I'm in support of option B, so let me wrap that around a little bit. So outside of the options A or B keeping McAllister as a as a potential from the policy perspective, the options that are up on the screen right now, what I'm hearing is number one, Colleg co-locate hot Air. It's the warming center. And to improve visibility. But then with questions that cherish asked related to, does that location make sense in order for people to have access to it based on what community reach, seeing what other organizations are seeing? So McAllister may or may not be the answer. It should still be on the table, potentially as an answer. But the the policy goals, I think, are the more important questions tonight so that they can continue to look at those options. Yeah, I think option one and two, like I said, I, I guess my big thing with the just some of the things I've heard is like, totally agree that, like, we should find space for the community band, but I feel like that's a, it's an important point and I think we can find the space. It's just I feel like it needs to be separate from this conversation about, you know, and everybody use McAllister. It's it's one of the three. It's just one of the pieces of the puzzle. Yeah. And it's, you know, I don't want us to put off doing something that we could do sooner rather than later. If it's just space for the band and the choir, because I know there's other spaces that we have in the city that could be used.

I, I think all the time about our, our arts areas that I think are underutilized. And we should put that stuff together. So it's more it's utilized more. So I'd have John and Justin. All right. Thank you. Great presentation. As always. You know, you know, following up on, you know, what my colleagues have said, you know, they all have data points. You know, Devin and we're really not, you know, the band, the chorus. And then also cherish bringing up, you know, you know, we need to have something where the where the folks in need are. So, I agree with, Mayor pro tem, you know, for the policy standpoint, for concept B, as much as I like C code together, I reached out to Tansy also earlier about that situation where we can move code, where community connection is. Now, when we move community connections to McAllister, if we go forward with this, but still, we definitely need to get the resources where folks are. And, you know, just like the city's club with anything with two amazing facilities, one done, one getting ready to be done, you know, we can collaborate with Community Reach Center because they have that big footprint right there, right in church. Justin's backyard that, you know, we can get help to people in need, you know, and that's what we're here for is to help our most awesome. So I am for I am for number two. Just number. Oh, you mean option B. Option B. Yeah actually number two. Yeah. Looking at the policy goals. So I'm still hearing one, two and four as the primary on those that are on the screen right now. Is that correct. Yeah. Doesn't you have policy goals. One, two and four are very important. I think that's why this grant was brought up in the first place for all council. Previous council. So,

I'm glad that you can bring it in that way. So, yeah, I agree, those are the priorities. Any objection to that? So I think what you've heard tonight, if I can reframe everything, is that one, two and four, the priorities for the policy goals McAllister is an option may not be the best option based on those goals. I do think there has been some conversation about the band making sure there is a space for them having that conversation. It is, to your point, secondary. However, they we do have an agreement with them and an expectation, and so I would not want to kick them out without having a plan in place. Thank you. I think this is the direction we will follow back with some city we've talked to have policies, but you know or this we're not going to do nothing right? You're right. We're not doing nothing. But we can't answer the next steps until they we answer the those three policy questions specifically the location in particular. Does McAllister make sense? If it does, then we come back and talk about whether option therapy works as or so. What does that mean? Because I think we're going to get alternatives to McAllister or whether we bring their policy goals. And I mean then we're looking at sites throughout the whole city now. I think those goals, I think what we'd like to do is kind of take there's there are a number of, you know, requests that came out through, I think we'd like to take that. And there was an suggested engagement with community partners, not only the band, but and, the human and social service sort of realm. So, I'd like for us to have the ability to kind of, step back and come back and propose, next steps in terms of engagement. That sound like there was maybe general consensus that this is, we might act with urgency, but but keep this sort of relative within a longer, thoughtful prioritization with other resources.

So I think all of that is really helpful direction that can help us, step back and come back with some next steps to, get additional information, get additional engagement, and come back with a more refined set of, options. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Fireworks. Yeah. So, many of you probably know, Lieutenant Peterson, he's going to be coming to the, So it's, I think after, last year, after the 4th of July, I think those in preparation and follow up, I think we wanted to evaluate some of our ordinances to make sure that we have appropriate tools. So some of that has happened. So I'm going to give the floor. We will do just a very brief. We know that, fireworks are an area of priority for some of your committee members. I'll do just a little bit of a sneak peek, you know, as we start to anticipate enforcement needs like we did last year. You do have time on there. Look, I had to do a really intentional, And June, what is our engagement and, enforcement strategy, but, Lieutenant Peterson, I'll give a little bit of a teaser on some of that tonight as well. Perfect. Thank you for the intro. We already kind of covered this, obviously, last year for the 4th of July, we were asked the legal and the police department were asked to revise the firework strategy and look at the ordinance and see if we can improve on that in any aspects, because enforcing it is would have been difficult in the past. And after sitting with legal and kind of evaluating it, the biggest issues were enforcement is basically difficult because we have to not only catch somebody in the of

letting the fireworks figure out which individual was lighting the fireworks, and then catch them before they run in a house or scatter away, or have any of those issues. And then obviously, the amount of complaints or calls for service we have on fireworks is a little overwhelming that time of year. And based off of everything we went through, the first change is pretty subtle. We're just taking it from chapter ten to chapter 38 and placing the ordinance, and we're probably should have been all along with all the other things that we write in the municipal court, and then also an increase in the max, fines and not necessarily a dollar amount. But the old ordinance basically said first offense was 500 bucks, second offense was a thousand bucks, but you had to get that second offense within a 12 month period, which also also wasn't super feasible. And there's really no teeth to that, because if we write you a ticket on July 3rd and the next year and July 4th, you're back in the clear to receive the same $500 fine. If you don't see it. And so, based off of when these happen in that it's a yearly event, 12 months doesn't make a whole lot of sense for that. So we changed that from 12 months to 24 months to two years. So you'd be on the hook for the higher fine for two years after your first infraction. And then the bigger piece of that is it will allow officers to cite the homeowner, for the infraction for fireworks, instead of having to identify the particular individual who had the match in his hand or lighter in his hand, which will make enforcing that and holding homeowners who are having the parties and doing the big fireworks displays liable, as opposed to just finding the one kid with the with matches hand. This is just a little bit of data, just to kind of show you why it was an issue. We can pull this out real quick. As far as last 4th of July, just the night of the fourth, we had over 210 fireworks complaints the evening of July 4th.

So if you've got two guys driving around the city trying to enforce fireworks infractions and they're getting overloaded like that, that's that's quite a bit. And then a week in either direction, we're looking at, 500 plus complaints for each of those weeks, which can be a little overwhelming. Also, a lot of the complaints that come in are and rightfully so, I understand a lot of, citizens are upset. They're, you know, they they're they're this is what's going on. They're hanging up. They're anonymous, which also makes it difficult to get information and actually figure out where things are going on. And a lot of times they don't know what's going on. They just know they're sitting in their house and listening to fireworks until the clock memorial's frustrated with it. So I think the couple changes to the ordinance will make it easier for not only to cite the homeowners, but actually do follow up as well. Do, these obviously aren't crazy in-depth investigations as far as complexity, but, if we get a complaint, we go down there and there's a bunch of firework debris in somebody's front yard and watch people hanging out, it makes a lot easier to kind of walk up and address the issue with the homeowner. Preventative measures. This is kind of a sneak peek. We had some success last year. We will be doing using the mobile messaging boards to deploy throughout the city just to reinforce to citizens that fireworks are prohibited in the city. That'll start four weeks prior to the 4th of July. Well, obviously work with Kai and, PIOs to put out some announcements and obviously our enforcement posture and reinforce that it's prohibited and what you can and can't do. Briefing trainings will be conducted through all patrol shifts to make sure that both sides, the week and all shifts have the same stance and are citing people accordingl and, community, the close, will do what they did last year. We had a lot of success with that, where they're identifying high problem areas from the year before. And going up to some of the high density housing areas and actually contacting management and folks that they have good relationships out there

and essentially educating and pleading, especially with our stance this year, I don't know if anybody knows, but we didn't get a whole lot of snow or water this year, so fireworks might be a little bit scarier this year than they had been in the past. So those efforts will also be made on the front end. And then as far as actual enforce additional enforcement, efforts, overtime shifts will be scheduled like we have in the past. We've had success with that. We do two weeks prior to the 4th of July, two weeks past the 4th of July, unidentified times and dates. Obviously, the weekends become our biggest priorities. That's when we see most of them. Fireworks enforcement cars will utilize unmarked vehicles, which actually helps them. Obviously, you see more patrol cars from halfway down the block, and we see a lot more scattering. Makes it a lot easier to get up there and do some enforcement. We will have two fireworks and four cars over two overtime shifts on each day that we deem that we need them from 2100 til zero two in the morning. Those are our high peak hours for fireworks. And the city event itself for the 4th of July. We have plenty of presence at that. So they will be folks that are. We won't need additional manpower at the event. But on the 4th of July we will have roving cars throughout the city as well. Daniel. Complaints. I don't. All right, Devin, I'm not general knowledge kind of absorption thing tonight. Someone has lots of questions like, Forgive my ignorance. Can you explain what the difference is when it goes from a chapter 32? A chapter ten actually entails not really a whole lot. Chapter 38 is our, is is our law enforcement and our basically our criminal code, of offenses in chapter ten, and our previous, versions were just based on the international fire code. So what we're doing is we're just moving it for clarity of prosecution.

And as as the lieutenant mentioned, the really significant change is making the property owner liability, provision, because that is consistent with how we handle nuisance abatement, generally because a lot of low level crimes don't get an immediate response and do require some amount of, of follow investigation, which the two parties are not going to be able to do at midnight on on the third into the fourth. And for us, it's really just work. Should have always lived. And there's a few things that just never got caught, I think in the right place. Essentially. So every big cop out there on the 4th of July every year goes, oh, is that statute? Because everything they write in immunities of a 38 code. And then this one thing they got to write is in some random spot, and then everybody has to look it up, figure out where does it trigger. So that leads into my next question. Then there's, you know, the the idea of changing the law so that we, we write the property owner up instead of, the person who's actually holding the match. That seems concerning in my sense, because we're prosecuting without having the evidence of actually pushing the crime, the person who actually did it. But what is the situation where it's a rental property or commercial property, or if it's teenagers who just go out on a cul de sac and they're not technically on somebody's property itself. So you're right, there are proof issues with both kinds. So for example, the kind of situation that is contemplated here is we get a list of complaints, over the course of the third and the fourth, and then on the fifth to the six officers are doing follow up investigations. They go to a property where, where it was alleged that there was a problem and the lawn is full of debris and burn marks, and then they can make a knock on the door, speak to the, to the property. Whoever answers the door, they can talk to the neighbors and gather. If there's more time to build, a little bit more of an investigation.

And again, that's classic nuisance abatement issues. You still to you can still issue the citation, and they could still issue the citation to the person who's actually lighting the match in the moment. It's just as indicated. That's it's rare. And it's you know, if you think about it, it's kind of the same conversation that you have the same problem. You have, you know, around college towns where there's underage drinking parties going on and the neighbors are calling it about the hub a little bit. There's parties everywhere and there's kids everywhere, and you have to do the same process. So it is a matter of there needs to be evidence, right, to be able to write it. So it's not just, you know, somebody said that you were allowing people to shoot off fireworks and we're going to write you the ticket. There's going to be evidence. And typically what we would also like to see is some evidence that the property owner knew about it and allowed it. So that would just be in the normal course of the investigation that you develop that. Now, if kids are in the, in the, street, just shooting off from the cul de sac, that is what it is. And there isn't going to be a property owner liability. Now, chances are, again, depending on the evidence that's received from the neighbors are it's those two kids who lived there. And then the officers follow up on that house saying, who lives here? And you go from there. Now in terms of, rental property versus, owner occupied property, we can issue, to I believe we could issue to both, either the tenant or the property owner, which is also consistent with the instance payment. And we'd have to just figure that out. What what makes the most sense in terms of who's allowing it, who's not allowing us. And like with many other nuisance kinds of properties, if you have repeat chronic offenders, part of our programing is to educate the property owner, the landlord, if you will, about the duties. They have to make sure that their, their, their tenants are not causing a nuisance in the rest of the neighborhood. Yeah, I think. You can talk to code compliance.

I'm sure that all agree that rental properties are great about making sure their contents are keeping up on everything, so, Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I, I just have concerns with the fact that we would go after because it again, it it comes down to a situation of, you know, the kids want to run over to the neighbor's house and lock stuff off because the neighbor's out of town. You guys show up the next day. There's debris everywhere. There's stuff everywhere. But then that person is going to prove that, hey, I wasn't even home. What are you talking about? And for us, it's not going to be any different than any other crime. The cops that are writing these tickets are going to have to have probable cause to write the tickets, and there's going to be some situations where they're going to go out there and they're going to look at and they're not going to have enough, and they won't write a ticket. The reality of the situation for us, though, is when we go out there, a lot of the times, sometimes it is kids and then they run into whatever residents they're actually associated with, and it's usually not really hard to figure out through the neighbors who those kids are, who their parents are. A lot of times you can just get a phone number for one of them and give them a call and sort all of that out. And then the other piece is a contact with the homeowners isn't usually the issue for cops when we go out on these things, right. Like it's it's the party. It's the neighborhood thing. Everybody's like them. Off we go. We'll talk to the homeowner and we'll get the responsible. I wasn't doing it. But, yeah, you're throwing the party. It's clearly in your driveway. And if nobody here wants to fess up to who is doing it now. Yeah, you live here. You can be. You can be liable for this nuisance that we're having. And you're allowing this to happen on your property. That's more likely what we're going to see then. Yeah. And when we get to those portions where it's we can't prove, you know, one way or the other, and it's going to be like any other crime force than somebody is not going to be cited. So thank you. I have John and Roberta. Thank you. Great presentation as always. And yeah, my neighborhood is always nice, quiet except for the fourth and and then last year, the,

my neighbor across the street from me there because there's like one part of neighbor that they do the what they do the thing. Right. And one of the block goods came into the house and luckily they were home. So they called 911. And luckily it was about 1130 alone, 35. So we were winding down at Carpenter with our cell with the legal celebration. So they got there like that, which I was greatly relieved for. But still that happens like earlier in the can't and could have been a whole different outcome. So, I do, you know, agree. So what Devin brings up, we don't want to I mean, we need to know because I'm dealing with the Ebi thing right now. You know, we need to, but we don't want to be punitive either. So we I think this approach still is good. So that way, I mean, first off, if you're holding the party, it's obvious then. Yeah, you're going to get cited under this updated ordinance. But you know, but you can't prove it then, you know, and that's they can't say the specific thing. Obviously you can't do that. But still I am supportive of this thinking. Roberta, I'm supportive of this. I guess the concern I've seen from a few residents is, Well, first of all, I was wondering if we could get, like, I know you last year. You guys give us data, but if we could get data from the last five years of. Just like, just to kind of know how many tickets have been written. Because I know last year it wasn't very many. I think it's really difficult. And so I'm hoping this kind of changes that situation. But if we could just get the data just so we can kind of see what it looks like, because I think what's more frustrating than anything for our residents is that we have this law, and then people just continue to break it and it can't be enforced. So my hope is that this will help enforce it better. But, it's in San Jose. They allow residents to submit photo and video evidence after the fact, and that enables enforcement even when the officers are not able to respond in real time.

Just curious if that would work here. You know, I know there's a lot of legal implications to all this stuff. And then in Long Beach, they've seen a significant reduction in complaints, down roughly about 75% from the pandemic. Pandemic times, after, implementing a multi department strategy that included targeting the suppliers of the fireworks and increasing penalties. And I think that's probably something we could look at. But one of our suppliers is Wyoming, right? Yeah. Yeah. Not far away I mean it's county. So like not sure if there's anything that we could support or if there's like something maybe that whether it's state led thing or county thing of like how do we like work in partnership with our other governmental entities to like we're sitting here saying that we don't want fireworks and, you know, cities, but they could just hop over to like, Devonshire. And there's probably some selling there right there. And I was like, just I mean, those that neighborhood thinks are sort and pretty much, you know, and they come over here and they have all these fireworks or, you know, I, we can't do anything about Wyoming, but it's just that they just you know, if like, if it's easier to grab them and light them and we have these horrible drought situations, just something to think about. But, so also like, maybe, you know, if everybody agrees on this, we have consensus to move forward when the ordinance is changed. Could there be a clear step by step explanation for how residents are expected to report the fireworks, illegal fireworks that we that we know what tools are available to do that and what platforms to use, whether it's calling the cops 911 you know, my thought map, I'm not sure if that would be an option or not, but just so we know exactly as residents how to report this stuff so we can make your job easier, but also make sure it gets reported and taken care of.

Not sure if that's possible as pipes call on you guys. And I know on 4th of July it's crazy. But, those are just some of the concerns I've seen because and it's it's a real thing. Like, you know, I had a resident last year, there's like, they're just lighting him and they're going right on my roof and there's I could call, but nobody can do anything about it because by the time you guys get there, you know, I think the thing is, you light fireworks and you run, right? You're not, like, sitting there. I just want a fire working. So, yeah, that those are the questions and concerns I have for residents. I think you're going well, I think, you know, going working backwards. I think you're right. Adams County should be theoretically an easier fix in having a county regulation for the, incorporated areas, because it is they're living in the same environments. We are with the same drought. We're not you know, state law would even be better. But it seems to me the easier fix would be going in at least the county. So that's but that's kind of a, purview of, of yours and, and direction to, to, you know, our lobbying groups and whatnot. But so that's one option. You're right. Wyoming probably is a bridge too far. But but I do think, though, that the bigger, easier fix is going after the unincorporated Adams County issues. As far as the evidence piece about what you mentioned about San Jose, that is the kind of evidence we look for, right, is because we we, you know, the police department issues tickets all the time based on what we call information and believe that the witnesses I saw this person do that x, y and z. And as long as that person's work, willing to come to court and testify under oath. Yeah, I saw so and so light that they work. That's fine. It doesn't have to be a police officer being the, the observer. I will note, like many other kinds of nuisance abatement laws, we are always very careful. We mean the prosecutors and the police in getting involved in neighborhood disputes, because a lot of times you get neighbors who don't like each other that have nothing to do with fireworks.

It's because their kids got in a fight. Yeah, you make too much noise. And so you have to really be careful about when you're proceeding. I'm prosecuting that you're not falling into that trap yet. But again. But from to answer your question. Absolutely. We can do that. And I'm sure that the police department and our office can put together a guide for neighbors to, to, to help them not only with fireworks but other neighborhood issues, because quite honestly, that's what we see and we know support a lot. I mean, I was thinking like a triangle earlier, like about like, you know, Facebook video of what it looks like or, you know, just like some communications out there. So, folks, I think we see all the signs and all the Facebook posts about their legal, but like number one, residents that want to report it or just like, I didn't want to call the cops and you should have, you know, they're blowing up a tree in my neighborhood one year, and I started because I was like, this is getting out of control. Like, where do you draw the line? It's not a black cat anymore. Now it's like dynamite or something, you know? So I guess that's just, you know, just giving people the information because we hear it all the time, and it's just like, it just feels like it's impossible to enforce it. But I do think this ordinance change will help a little bit for sure. I think it's going to help with the pieces that you're asking about to be able to take video quite a bit, and they do try to give us stuff, but those were the hang ups sometimes, like I got video, but I'm like, that's awesome. And then you show up and then I've got a video in the dark, you know, six houses down and I can just see six silhouettes out there writing fireworks, even though I know what house it's coming from. In the past, we wouldn't have been able to enforce that because we can't tell who's doing what down there. Now, with that video evidence, it will make it easier for us to know that it came from that location, and we don't have to identify the one person who was lighting. Yeah. So it will help the evidence that people already collect for us to do. It's just that's that's been rough in the past. And then the data that you requested is going to be given. We can get that to you pretty quickly. That's. Yeah I yeah I meant to say these residents are concerned

like that was just like last year. I think it was like a million calls for service. And we gave out three, ten guys. And people are like, what? Like that? Just so disappointing, right? Because you're hearing them all night early. Absolutely. A year. So. Oh, I'm totally on board for this, but I would like to see our mobile messaging boards get out now and talk about maybe, you know, some cities already have them out saying, you know, like cigaret butts plus, high wind equals brush fire. And maybe we'll start getting those out now and start getting the message out that, you know, and then see, I'm flipped over later because we're still obviously in a very high fire danger. Yeah. So I would like to see those moved out now. They're even seeing on the news like watch don't do fire step outside. Yeah yeah. You know don't park in dry grass. There's cars. So I'm not hearing any objection to the ordinance changes. When would that come to council for vote. I don't think we have it on the calendar. But I think the ordinance is prepared to wait to read that forward. Pretty quickly. So, we probably won't have that for next Tuesday, because we're pretty far and working on the packet that we can, look at, probably the 28th. Yes, I know there's one at city. Could you guys do maybe like when you do the presentation? When we do, the presentation would be on a consent calendar. Would it be an actual. It'll have to be an ordinance. Yeah. So that takes two readings. Right. Okay. So when you guys present that, could you do like just a step by step kind of report or what that would look like. So that means like out there where we have a, a meeting to thank you for your first reading, as always, on your action. Yeah. Calendar. The second reading, depending on how to vote, cook, could go to consent, but there'll be a presentation with your first reading that a presentation? Yeah. Thank you. All right.

Let's talk for 4th of July. Right. And, staying on fireworks. So yeah, we've got several scenes tonight that are running through the do, that Chris. Thank you. Here to, and I do want to thank both Chris and Sean Sadler and the purchasing team to move really quickly on outreach to vendors to understand what opportunities are available. So, this is a follow up to a request from, those numbers, the council at your last planning session, this is maybe mayor again, mayor pro tem, city council members. Yeah. So, I, I have gotten these comments about purchasing contracts and purchasing. They, they jumped right on this and, and helped us out to, to look at some options. So kudos to that to that team. So but hopefully tonight, what we can what we'll be able to provide for you is some alternative options to the fireworks show. And we'll, and you guys can make the best decisions. You feel that, you need to make for for the 4th of July, the agenda will be a brief background, the alternatives we just mentioned, and then some options to consider. But see. Okay, so if you recall a couple weeks ago, you, you, you gave us direction to, to look up some alternatives based upon the fire and, and the drought. And we've done that. I just wanted to remind council that historically, we have not canceled our fourth of our professional show on the 4th of July, and and we have tried to, take into account the drought and precautions they're in. And then, last Tuesday, when we had had received this, all the alternatives

from our purchasing and contracts division, there's there was a little bit of desperation because everybody was is first come, first serve. But I do have some good news, after talking with those folks today. But so you see that date on there because it was there was a little bit of frantic first come, first served us. And that's why we wanted to to say that it's based upon availability. And then, of course, there is a train of thought out there that if we do have a professional show that we we can provide an alternative for, for folks so that maybe they're not doing their own illegal show. So this is the slide with really the the meat and potatoes. I can't my eyes aren't that good. So I'm going to, so we, we've provided or at least we have one laser show, option, $25,000, 20 lasers. And it's a 15 minute show. We'll come back to that when I'm going to show you guys some pictures on the next slide. And I, I've made a comment here on the bottom that that's not really our recommendation, but I'll, I'll come back to that one in the next slide. So then the the we've got three drumming options and you can see with if we, if we take into account the, the 300 drones, do you see a wide ranging price here? The UAV Pro, it's offering us 300 drones for $41,000. That's who we have used before for our, for our Winterfest, drone show. So that is a company that we have used. Now, you look at, show duration, it's not uncommon for a drone show to be 10 to 15 minutes. In this particular case. You know, you see that here?

But that is not uncommon. And then the number of designs that is, is really how many designs that they can create in that 10 or 15 minutes in the sky. So that's what the number of designs are. And then the last, the last box there is that is zoom belly fireworks is who we used for our current firework show. That's our current price of 40, $42,000, and it's a 19 minute show. So that at least gives you some comparison lasers, drones and then fireworks. So here's here's what I wanted. Why I wanted to, show you the different options and then talk about drones or. Excuse me, lasers. First, for those of you who've been to the fireworks show, folks are scattered all over Karpenter Park. I mean, and when I say all over, it's literally at the Active Adult center due to, Colorado Boulevard, etc. they're all over. Right. So this laser show is more of a lower profile. It's more attached to a stage. So if we consider everybody that's all over Karpenter Park, I, I would recommend that we don't go with the laser show and stay more with with a drone show as an alternative. And, and there's a couple, examples of 150 drones. So both of those examples up there have 150 drones. We would be doubling that to 300 if we, you know, chose one of these options or cheaper options. Not even. But that gives you some perspective of what what what we could offer. And then, you know, certainly holler if you've got questions,

but then that kind of takes us to that, that all the options I've got. Steve, play the fire chief here to, to help me with the first option. But, you know, option number one is to allow the fireworks show to move forward as planned. Thank you. Whoever changed that? The, Steve. Steve is, the fire department recommends that or at least has minimal concerns if conditions continue into July. For the fireworks. So, every year we're monitoring conditions prior to launching the fireworks. If we have wind conditions, we will either delay, or stop the fireworks from occurring. So that is a practice that we would not change this year either. If the decision as to move forward with the fireworks, as in previous years, we've put a number of personnel out on the field, in the fall out area and around, the park, to ensure that when we do, if and when we do have starts, that we are there to suppress them. This year we'll be putting additional resources in place if this is the decision to move forward. And as we move towards as we move in the event we could have weather conditions, could change significantly between now and the 4th of July. We could have significant moisture and have very different conditions. We could also have continued drought conditions. But as in previous years, we are prepared to mitigate the circumstances associated with those conditions. And I wanted to mention to we this is, the bullet number three on this slide. We we do use six inch shells. And so you've got a you've got to provide a fall out zone of 70ft/in. So we could lower the, the shells size if, if the council would like to move forward

with the show with a lower sized shell count or shell size. And so that's option number one. Option number two is replace the, the fireworks show or the fireworks piece with an alternative that I've showed you. And then just keep keep everything as is and just replace the fireworks portion of the event. Option three would be we have a, an event from 12 noon to 8 p.m.. That's really the the existing show with Corey Brunson, the Corey Brunson Band and The skydivers as a finale. And then we send every send everybody home. Prior to you know, about 8:00 that that option would of course not have any fireworks or drones. And and I guess at the end of the day. That has a potential to save some money, but it it's not probably the best option. And then, of course, number four is cancel the 4th of July in its entirety. All right, I got Roberta and then Devin. Well, I live right up the street from this show. So if we were to do option three, what's going to happen is everybody's going to go down there and listen to some music at your home, blow up the neighborhood. And that's honestly not great because the fires people make with their own shows are much more dangerous and spin out spread out throughout the whole entire neighborhood and everywhere else. So at least if there's some sort of show in the evening, people get tired enough that maybe they'll blow off less fireworks when they go home.

So. I don't like three and I don't like four. I like 2 or 1. I'm leaning towards two. All right, Devin, and then you're, If we lowered the shell size and sort of price, quality of fireworks, and changing from a six inch to, 5 inch or 4 inch. So that's a very good question. And I have not talked with our, with our firework vendor. So it's going to it's going to lower the show. I mean from a height perspective for sure. They, they are I would consider to be the best fireworks vendor. That we, that we could find. So I believe they would try to create a very positive show for us. It just keeps the footprint a little smaller, but, personally, in my opinion, is, you know, I would like to see what kind of changes that would affect as far as, like, how much it would lower the show as far as the fireworks. But, I think that I think the, the fireworks show this year is going to be a really big deal. I think the citizens are really kind of push for that. More for the 70th anniversary of our city, or the 150th anniversary and state the 250th of the country. I think this show is a critical show for putting that on. So my choice would stay with the firework show, but I would be interested in seeing what that reduction like as far as, like height wise would do. And, you know, being the chief Kelly is this, you know, the,

confidence and knowing that we're we're safe in that aspect. I think we go with option one. I do than Justin. Yeah. I would agree with with that. And I love that you guys fire department you have, some mitigation there as business as usual and elevated even, for this year. And I'd like to see us continue forward, with the current plans. And part of that is in the hope that three months we've had some rain. Yeah. And I do feel better about the fact that, you know, it's a bad day, you know, windy and, you know, we're we're dealing with other issues, that there is still the ability to cancel that. It's not like we're forcing ourselves to do the show of conditions are right. But at least we have the opportunity to do it still, in the hope that they are great. Justin and John. Well, Chief Kelly, thank you for, highlighting some additional safety measures. And, to be honest, I have a lot of trust in you and a lot of faith in you. So, if you feel like we can do the fireworks show, you be safe. Given all that and with your team, then I'm confident that we can go with option one to keep the fireworks. But I want I want your recommendations on how to modify it. Any think you suggest? I'm going to go with. So we will we will put what I think are reasonable. Procedures in place to mitigate the risk associated with follow from the firework show. I think there'll be a question about what the size of the mortar changes would affect the fallout zone. Again, I am confident in our ability to manage the area as we have in previous years. And I think what we've seen, fireworks shows we've had challenging, you know, challenging events, it is our ability to put personnel very quickly on those events in a controlled environment, to manage them.

So that, again, I think that is going to be consistent in that area where we have the firework show with previous year. If we do see weather conditions or we're dealing with fire weather watches or red flag conditions, as in previous years, we would be canceling the show or would be or it would be very closely monitoring wind speeds and wind gusts to determine we do this with the, the parachutes as well. And when, they can jump and we do that with the, with the fireworks as well, with a sort of a fallback position of saying, no, go, I will add the community appreciates that much more than saying not happening if you come out. I was like, well, the weather can't do it. They understand that in the moment. You got John? Yeah. Thank you ma'am. Great presentation as always. You know, I, I agree with, you know, Robert does have a point with the drones, with the drought situation, but still, I am in agreement with the rest of my colleagues have spoken up. You know, like David said, it's the 70th anniversary of our city 150th anniversary. Our state turned 50th anniversary nation. You know, I think we need to proceed with this. I do want to see about the lower, the five and the four inch, both. See what the what that in that footprint would be. And obviously, Chief Kelly, you know, I'm going to lean on your guidance, you know, day of time of you know, if we have to cancel, we have to cancel. And I'll reiterate what Jan said, you know, folks will understand if we have the intent of doing the show. Okay, but we had to cancel, darn it, because of we have a we have a high wind warning and whatnot. But if we just did not do it at all, you then that's going to like that. That's the first point that cherry lights, that's where that's where the fire was going to be. Thorns could be in my neighborhood. It could be Brandon Place Park, I promise you that. So we definitely need to have the main we need to be able to to have the capability doing it day off. But then obviously,

you know, with your guidance and and with your team's guidance, obviously, you know, make a a game time decision depending on weather conditions at that time. Thank you. I mean, last time we had this conversation, I was like, yeah, I'm just pulling out your fireworks. But after talking with the few community members, it was definitely like back on the table for me, some lightning and people just getting crazy. But I think what really helped with that, too, is the fact that we had the discussion. I knew we were going to have a discussion about, the ordinance too, because I think we have to balance it with enforcing that law and having this show. It does it does help. Like at least there's a little bit of time people are waiting and looking at those fireworks instead of waiting their own. Yeah, it gets pretty crazy. So they're stuck in traffic. They can't get home that that's. And then they're like in front of my house for an hour and a half. So you're providing the beard. But yeah. Yeah. Everybody wants to park in the house and walk down and then come back and, so I'm hearing we move forward as planned with the mitigations in place as needed. I correct. Thank you. Thank you. And, well, I just want to close this out here that she had received, some, use and nonprofit funding requests there was a request, on last Tuesday night to to try to, incorporate a request from additional organization. We did not get that information. And at that time to be in the packet. But I do believe staff will be able to speak to it at a high level. Tonight, in terms of, the, future forward. So we've got four youth event, funding requests and one nonprofit, funding request to talk to you tonight. I'll go through the background,

talk about the process, and look for your direction. On the the youth, youth event funding request. I don't think we've had one of these with, this, council, so I wanted to just spend a little bit of time on the program. This program is laid out in your Council policy 5.3 and is intended to assist youth, basically, who are, competing or participating in an event. So it is event specific. Not not at least this is your policy. So they're your rules. You you you've made them up and I suppose could change them if you wanted to. But as the policy is written, it's really not about, supportive of an ongoing program. It's really specific to an event, which these, these, applications qualify. The the applicants are current, according to current process are limited to $300 requests per individual or $600 for a group. And like I said, all of these events must meet the criteria in the policy and the ones that are in front of you do, so, this will look familiar to those of you who've been on council. We have four youth funding requests, all for, robotics, competitions or world championships. So, one group, participating in the Vex IQ World Championship, which I understand is a middle school specific, competition. And then three others, the one on the previous slide and then two on this slide, that are participating in the next robotics world Championship and sort of high school competition. So, each requested $600 for their, their sponsorship. Like I said, we also got a request for another, event sponsorship, which we talked about a couple weeks ago. So I won't go through the background of that, policy or sexual in your, ordinance for reimbursement of travel training. This was for the doctor Cog 2026 award celebration happening in August downtown.

$1,200 for, government sponsorship. I believe you sponsored this last year. So, the next slide shows you the budget summary where we are. So to date, we've got 35,000 budgeted for these combined programs. To date, you've allocated 19,800. The additional sponsorships would be 36. For youth. Plus the doctor cocktail would be 3600, giving a total expended of, $23,400. And the remaining balance would be 11, thousand $600. Here's the list of everybody that you've approved thus far. And so we're looking for your direction on the for, for youth. And then the doctor called, for that. Any objection? No. So, so Tansy had mentioned the, the pathways school, so we did reach out to them. Last was that that was last week after they came and spoke and council sent them the some of the application materials. We just where they confirm they've received it and are working on it and have not submitted it back to us yet. So once we have that, we'll evaluate and bring it back for your consideration. So I I'm sorry. We're good on all, good on all fronts. Us thank you. Thank you. All right. Next is a board of Commission reports. Any updates? Yeah, not a lot, but, I think the short version I definitely notes. So starting with data, we updated the guiding policies to include our document to update it. So that includes USC five and I 76. Really minor stuff. But it was specifically called out that we want to address coroners as well. Also, we found out pretty well we were you at the time. We're expecting the, Transportation Commission to, pass or vote on the ten year

plan in April, but that has since been postponed to May later, I believe it's May. And, you know, we're looking for more encouraging. Anybody to come in and testify during public comments. Data anticipates the ten year plan passing as is. But also things have happened lately that are difficult to wrap my head around. So you never know. Also, the, the, almost ten year plan, the advocacy shift will move towards, advocating for projects on the state transportation improvement plan and also the Doctor Carr Transportation Improvement Plan, which is for federal and state funding. And then also always looking at ways to speak in front of CTO meetings and Transportation Commission. We also let's see, we heard from RTD and, I think it's worth noting this wasn't discussed. Well, I'll say it because it wasn't discussed. Anita, maybe we should talk about maybe, you know, see, the state legislative update. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Moving on to Doctor Cog. The works board work session. There was a discussion on the regional housing strategy. The board expressed strong support for collaborative housing framework and emphasizing opportunities, not mandates. So there is a strong you say female doctor cog is also very, united on, advocating for protecting local control at the state level and the funding level. Trying to figure out what is skimpier. So there's that there's, there's a hesitation on traffic operations program. Just kind of give an insight into how the signal timing program agent doctor kind of works at a very technical. And then there was a

conversation about the Seattle upcoming Seattle peer exchange, in May, which I'll be going to we do have an agenda for that. I'd be happy to share with the council, if you're interested in as to what what's going to be going on with, you know, obviously transportation and housing, etc.. And that'll be, interesting. Thank you, everybody, for, approving the sponsorship request. And then finally, the doctor correspondence Finance Committee meeting. I was elected to serve as vice chair of the committee. And, we authorize up to $500,000 to be spent on the Choice Services transportation program. Just a little background. That program offers transportation for personal and medical appointments at no cost to those over 60 throughout the Denver area. It's one of the key programs that Doctor Cog supports and funds for services for older residents. So very glad that we do that. And that sums up what needs. Other board or committee updates. The AC rep back committee meeting. We talked about the RTD bills, so I'll hold off on that too until the state legislative update. And, council discussion items jump. Yes. Thank you. So I talked to, Gail Scholes who who's on the board on Monday, the AC for lunch and, thing about the e-bike situation. And drew as well, he recommended that we have a suggested speed limit of 20 miles an hour if they're on sidewalks and on, you know, in our parks. So I'm definitely in agreement with that. But I wanted to bring that up to council tonight and to staff, and we work on that. Are we having future discussion on e-bike ordinance? Yes. I think there was, a request made for a report.

We had already begun some cross-departmental analysis of work. So I think, that the feedback will make sure that that gets to the team that is working on that. Thank you. Ma'am, do you want your item on this or you have a separate one? Oh no. I'm just going to, go along with if I get it. Sounds like that's in the works. I think what I'm hearing from the community really is your just confusion about what an ordinance versus, like, what the pushing and what makes sense, and also what just would make sense based on reality of how people use these bikes. So, but I'm looking forward to that. The, That's okay. A couple of new items. I had an opportunity to, meet with people at the a nonprofit called the Naloxone Project, which they offer free naloxone to medical providers, community health boards, police and fire departments. And I know that thought, PD and thought fire and distributed these kits throughout our city. And my, request to our staff or council member to give direction is to, see how we could get our parks and rec staff to incorporate the naloxone project, to provide training to our staff, and also, naloxone, in case of an emergency, to, people who might be overdosing at our parks and recreational facilities, where time is of the essence. So, I think it would be great to, to reach out to them and I think it would also be good to maybe invite them to come to our one of our planning sessions, where they can kind of give an overview of all the things that they offer. And, and let us, you know, we can maybe collaborate on how we can get more involved with there. I think very important cause so I asked them if we could do those two things. We we can certainly coordinate from a parks perspective. I'll leave it to the discretion of the council. You're planning sessions are starting back up or maybe middle of summer, but there is, like, us

just having them come in wouldn't be an urgent thing. So we could do it if we have them. Send us the data. I mean, the information. I mean, we could just have our service. That'd be really helpful because I kind of used to be, opioid czar, right, with under advisor. And she actually brought that group in to several organizations in the area. So I think some of us have seen it, but I would love to get the data and the information that they have. Yeah, actually, that's even better because I'm not so interested in the data and also in it. I'd like to know how much, how many, opportunities and kind of help people in thought specifically and then to apply for half grants or, even with sponsorships, if they are helping as many residents as I think they are. But more importantly, I'd like to, you know, know our parks and recs also equipped with this tool and trained. It's really easy training. But, yeah, if you can help with an instruction, we'll follow up on those accounts. Okay. And then my second, issue is, you know, this is a follow up to our code enforcement presentation last week, and I'd like to see if there's interest in exploring, or expanding our volunteer program around, code enforcement that could potentially enlist, volunteers to help identify code enforcement violations. And in the proactive way. I'm not suggesting, like, deputizing to them or anything like that, but maybe creating a, a way to help engage our residents, who wants to be more involved and, to see what that might look like? I think there's a lot of opportunity there. Particularly in work one and two, if you remember the map that we saw last week, there's a majority of our violations in South Florida, and I have heard from many residents that they would be interested in helping out in any way they can. So I'd like to see if we could, explore what kind of, you know, volunteer. You know, we do have a volunteer coordinator, volunteer program.

See if we, see what that might look like with code enforcement. So I have a few concerns with that just from a liability standpoint. So worst case scenario, someone goes into someone's property and gets hurt because we're looking at a code violation. Would it make more sense to maybe do some social media training on how to use the app, because they can still submit the code concerns via the app and still basically take care of those issues without making it, like a go go forth and find things. It's here's the app, here's how to use it. How do you and. Well, yeah, I think I think you're just you're getting, kind of what I'm thinking, because I don't really know what this could look like legally. I guess my request is to see what we could do from a legal perspective, liability wise. And, you know, maybe I want to do this as much as we can, so there's more that we can do, while still sitting within the bounds of our, you know, liability, not putting people at risk. So it's more of an exploratory request to see, like, what are the options, what other cities do? And, you know, find out from there what our limits are. Yeah, I would, I would say that we should be cautious with that too, because you're under the situation that you run into that a lot of times with homes where people get power hungry, want to go knock on the door and be like, you need to fix your driveway or something's going on and someone's and tell them, get the hell off their property. Just like what we just talked about with fireworks has nothing to do with the violation. I just want to be clear again, my request is not to stay in the program right away. Based off of what we talked about here. I want to hear your concerns. I want to hear from staff. What staffs concerns are would be and what this could look like. I want to start a conversation. Not in the conversation. So my request isn't to go do something right away. My request is to open the door for a deeper conversation in what is the objective.

Again, the objective is to for the enforcement teams with the tremendous amount of work they have to do. And so, so like we're we're exploring citizens, doing more than reporting that a code violation, which they can do. Well, we are asking our staff to find out what what is in the universe of possibilities, to engage volunteers, to help us with the objective of reducing code enforcement violations. Since across the city and because there is a willingness among residents. Yeah, we don't know how they can achieve that goal. And I don't think the council is equipped to answer that question. So my request was to ask our staff to help us have that conversation, and then we can decide whether that is too much risk for us or not. We just it's too many unknowns. And unless we ask our staff to help us out, we'll never know. But my my question is also like, what? What's stopping them from doing that already with the my thought map? Well, we can stop this being reported as being followed up on the different issues. That's a different situation than having somebody reporting stuff to help code compliance. Well one there's us has many comments that there's on the trees with the, the app itself with people. There's not that much engagement. People don't know how to use it. So maybe what, what we end up deciding to do is a training program just on how to use the app, a social media program. It could be more than that, but we don't really know what the possibilities are unless we actually put some work into it. I think this is a worthy cause of putting some work into it, instead of just shutting the conversation down tonight, I don't think I'm sharing the conversation. Don't think I'm just asking a question on what would they do outside of that, because they can't go into the properties. They can't enforce the code compliance. Well, what I'm saying is let's have a more robust conversation.

I don't know if the answers to your question right now, and I think that we could get some of those answers. So we asked our team to to do a little digging to see what kind of opportunities there are. That's all I'm asking for. I think it's looking for more of a it's a broad request and maybe narrowing the request to make it a little easier for staff, because the broad request of how do we get people engaged with code is very vague. But if there's something specific to look at, what other cities are doing that might be easier for the concept to be able to be followed. I'm happy with starting just looking with what other cities are doing and related to related to, engaging volunteers in their code enforcement or. We can do some research. I'm not I wasn't, I'm not casually aware of programs like that, I think. But we can, try to understand what might exists or what opportunities, how to leverage our existing tools. So. Sounds like you're you're open to a broad set of recommendations. I think we we can without a lot of work, try to understand. Is there any programs out there that we can know on? And if they're not programs that exist, so are there some more specific policy direction or questions that we would need to if this was about creating a new program, you know, from scratch what kinds of direction or questions we would need to have answered? Yeah, that's what I'm I'm trying to say. Objection to that. Give Citizen Academy and others that might participate. And I know that we use them for certain events and stuff. So I don't I don't know the end goal like what he's saying, but I think there are willing volunteers that might be able to help code. And I think there's so much, pick up trash. Yeah, pretty sure we have that volunteer program. All right. Yeah. So if there's an opportunity

for some sort of volunteer program. Sure. Why not? Is that clear enough? Yeah, I, I think I might reframe this maybe a little bit in our research to be more about what does engagement and education look like in this space. And that could include volunteerism, but could include other kinds of, education outreach or engagement. If we've got kind of some latitude, I feel, that's more comfortable that we might find some practices that we could learn from. Anything else? Just know. All right. Any other council discussion items? I have one. Oh, go ahead and record. It's pretty easy. I just wanted to see if we can do autism acceptance and Arab-American Heritage Month and Earth Day for the month of April. Any objections to doing anything else? Evan? One of the things that came up in one of our forum meetings after was the last session or the meeting right before that was, regarding council and, travel policy concerns. It kind of stretched curiosity with me, and I kind of want to put something out with the rest of the council, as well as that I would like to see, maybe as a request for owners to request from staff or from council as a whole. But I kind of like to see a, more transparent, layout of when we're traveling in regards to the city itself as council not necessarily posted the public, because another cause of security concerns. But any time that we're traveling, it's gonna be based off of the taxpayers money going through that that is being shared between all of us, so that we're aware of these kind of travel things is going through and what that kind of calls is there. My concern is that it would turn into like a, a DeNiro effect and then kind of get out of hand

unless we can kind of keep each other in check, because it's not really the staff's point to keep us in check. It's more us going, hey, what's going on with the travel and what's happening there? So my my request would be that when we're traveling to different conferences, for different committees, different, meetings that, we relay that information on our calendars so that we're all aware and kind of share that information back and forth with each other so that that kind of gives that transparency and idea. Other. So when we when we do travel, if there's three or more of us, it does have to be posted publicly. Correct. But I'm just saying even if it's an individual aspect of it. So we're, you know, we're all on different committees and things go from not necessarily just statewide, but because national wide as well. So if we travel for specific committees, for instance, you and I are on the same committee the rest of the people are in. So that would be something that they may not be aware of. Conference coming up or something is going on, but we're sharing that information with each other so that not only are we aware of the spending the city is putting in place for all of this, but also for the awareness that, hey, these council members aren't going to be here during this time. No, I do not want that shared publicly. Because in the sense of when we're traveling, because I think that that's a security concern for all of us and our families, things of that nature. But if it's shared between all of us internally, I think that would be a good kind of move. Are you specifically saying more like the notices we get, like from Patty and Joanne and just like, all right, bird and dinner out this week. Similar. But but more of a instead of just going hey, Drew's out this week. That's more of a hey, Drew's out this week because he's at an LCS Energy Commission or whatever the situation is going on so that we're aware of he's he's out, but he's actually still doing is just helping our city because he's doing something for a committee that's there. We know that it's not a just a Drew's out because he wants to sit on the beach to see the things getting up and stuff like that. The there's already a week I'm going to miss

because I'm a resident, so I'm not saying that. But so is this like an interim until we do our full because we did our request. For reevaluation of our travel policy. So as I in the meantime, yes. Okay. Yeah. I'm sure we'll. Work a few more emails. Right. Yeah. Before anything else, do any other council discussion items. So can I clarify really quickly so that from a protocol expectation, people will communicate that to our admins and the CMO. And then we'll share that out just to make sure there's no, yeah. I mean, I feel like right now that's kind of the situation now anyways, we're going to move on to Patty and Joanne and something like, hey, we're going to be flying up here for this. So they are to kind of have an idea on it. So we will provide a lot of details, but have general heads up. And I think generally we would prefer communication that's going to everyone come from staff other than you all sending emails to everybody. So yeah, I mean he's right. There is a summer meeting for NRCs energy, environment, Natural Resources Committee that I chair and Devin is now on. We'll be attending that. So okay. Well, we'll try to if people can just make sure our office is in the loop, we'll try to work with you on, on how to make sure that we've got some way to get that information back out. Thank you. All right. State legislative update. Justin, would you like to start? Okay. And will the RTD. Oh, we want you to okay. And maybe this is a question for Peggy because I don't think the bill's been introduced yet. Yeah. So, I guess just a summary. RTD is I was actually more going to talk about the. That's what I meant. Sorry, not RTD front range passenger. I'm sorry. Troy Whitmore was on our call for AC rep and talked about it.

And he's the RTD director later. Yes. So, the the Front Range Passenger Rail District has been in the works for a while now, and one of the requirements to make this rail, program happen is creating a new, special district with taxation abilities. And we were, over the years or months previously, told that Oregon is not included in that district because we didn't have any stations within a mile buffer of, you know, we didn't none of our city was within a mile buffer of those stations over the past few weeks. The the group, I don't know who's Sudbury's passenger rail group that is trying to put this committee together. It has expanded as well. First of three miles, which now includes a segment of West Oregon. It includes our little streets, very small part of Fernley Village, mobile home park and some of railway station Park. So the western edge, neither of us will be taking the permanent passenger rail to Boulder. So this has some severe consequences in the city of Portland, because now that we have territory in that buffer, the entire city would then be a part of this district, which means that we would be included, that there would be extra sales taxes added on to, as part of that district. So, this is obviously not good for thought. And, because we're getting we're paying for it, but we're not getting the benefits of the station or the train. And, you know, many people, including myself, think this by design, the large city, you know, the Front Range passenger rail is expensive. So, I don't know where it's going. Legislators. I don't know what happens next, but it's on the table. So, I mean, I think we need Peggy to to reach out.

We had we a bunch of us found out about it at the extravaganza, talking with some of our other elected officials there, that this would be coming shortly. I don't think it's been introduced. I don't think there's a number assigned yet, but we were told it was coming very quickly. So if we could have Peggy again. Michael Irvin called them today and told me, we want contact with the governor's people because he's or one of those offices. And he told us to, it was something like thought we'd get some exclusion. They refuse three models and then just car mount review the question that was like at 2:00 this afternoon was probably no confirmation on. Right. That was the most recent one was just hours ago that he was telling me that whether it's true or not, I don't know. But that also makes sense. Like just car was out to a three mile radius. That's a very simple solution. Otherwise we're going to raise hell. Yes. Otherwise we're going to cost you a lot of money. And most of us have written it, as, position on SB 26 150. Mandy. Which one? That is. This is the one that shrinks the board and everything. We took a monitor position to ask them about what they would consider changing, specifically related to the elected officials versus doctor cog versus appointed. Okay. All right. I'm just, backing up on our AC rep. It did okay as well. Metro mayors also talked about it and same thing. Concern about the elected positions. One of the questions that came up was would we support more about talking about is how all of doctor calls or all of the four positions are appointed coming from Doctor Cog. And the consensus was not necessarily because it's so Denver centric that we wanted more representation outside of that area. And we talked about not, and we talked about it too much power from the governor's on on that here. Yes. Also make sure because they were to start on the two appointments go, was also on the same call. Yeah. RTD was taking a position tonight and I got hit up on some stuff. So I assume you know what position linked to the. I was assuming that they were going to be opposed to just speaking.

So. Yeah. So I said they had they had discussed in yet certainly. Well I think they're adamant are monitors. Well the conversation was a smaller board. Makes sense. More pay makes sense. Additional technical support makes sense but not as an appointed board position. Yeah. So it just seems like they're, Yeah. They're they're just getting a lot of push to go against the state legislature. Right. So I'm sure we'll hear more next week. Yeah. I think any other state legislative items coming up. All right. If you can let Peggy know. Yeah we will. All right. Thank you all very much. You can.