[0:02] And now call this meeting to order. Today is September 24th, 2024. Rules of decor,

[0:08] which I'll be strictly observing the hearing and copies of these roles can be found

[0:11] in the back of the room. Pete, do we have any deletions or changes to the agenda?

[0:15] The roll, do these changes to the agenda as well?

[0:18] I would like to move one item, number eight, on our individual to number one. I know that

[0:27] we have some people in the audience, and I'm sure they don't want to have to sit through

[0:30] the entire public hearing so we will be moving number eight to number one on

[0:36] individual.

[0:39] Okay thank you. We do have one presentation today and we will be

[0:45] presenting years of service awards to those who have served 20 or more years

[0:50] with Mesa County. We're really excited to present these to our amazing employees.

[0:56] They really are the heart and soul of Mesa County and they really serve our

[1:01] residents in a really meaningful way. So it is a really an honor to honor them today.

[1:08] So we have our 20 years of service and as you hear your name, please come forward, we'll

[1:13] be giving you a plaque and be able to honor you. And then once we have our 20 years service,

[1:20] please stay up here, we'll take a photo and then we'll be moving on to our 25 year and then

[1:31] office, James Cannon with the District Attorney Office, Jim Fogg with the Sheriff's Office,

[1:37] Joe Kellerby with Human Services, I guess you can applaud. Tim Morphen with facilities,

[1:45] Wade Pateco with the Sheriff's Office, Brady Surtan with their traffic, and Jeremy Sivaj with

[1:52] the District Attorney's Office, and Anthony West with their Sheriff's Office.

[1:57] Please give these folks a round of applause.

[1:59] So

[3:49] moving on to our 25 years of service.

[3:51] We have Rich Acker with Noreng Cooper, Human Services,

[3:57] Joe Hemmer, Joe Hemmer, Criminal Justice,

[4:00] John Hilder-Bange, with their Sheriff's Office,

[4:03] Marcella Hope, with their Sheriff's Office,

[4:06] Bambi Hughes, Human Services,

[4:09] Chris Cazal with IT, Art Smith with Sheriff,

[4:14] and Lynn Williams with our District Attorney.

[4:16] Susan

[5:24] Anderson with the assessor's office,

[5:31] Lailana Bulls with IT,

[5:38] Pam Noonan with Finance,

[6:17] all of our employees that serve Mesa County and serve our residents, we truly are T Mesa.

[6:24] In commissioners, do you have any reports today?

[6:28] I do not.

[6:29] Okay.

[6:30] Great.

[6:31] Pete, do you have a county administrator report?

[6:33] Just to say a same thing, being the turnout and the support and the continuing building

[6:40] of Team Mason with all that are important to us, so that's all I got to thank you.

[6:45] Thank you so much.

[6:46] We will be moving on to public comment.

[6:50] This portion of our agenda provides the public an opportunity to speak to the Mace County

[6:54] Board of Agenda Items will not be allowed during public comment.

[6:57] In rules of decorum, shall we strictly enforce in each person who will have three minutes

[7:01] to comment?

[7:03] There is a light at the lecture and that will signal when your time is up.

[7:10] A green flashing light will be two minutes yellow light, you have one minute

[7:14] remaining and a red light your time will be up and no speaker may yield its

[7:18] their time to any other speaker.

[7:23] And if there's still some notes or prepared notes that you have and your

[7:27] time is up you can hand those notes over to our county attorney or

[7:31] administrator. Is there anyone here with public comment?

[7:42] Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on

[7:45] to our consent agenda. The consent agenda is intended to allow the board to spend

[7:49] its time on more complex items and these items are generally perceived as non-controversial

[7:54] and an item may be removed from the consent agenda by the board and addressed in item seating

[7:58] individual consideration if deemed not any of these items. I don't. Does anyone in the audience

[8:04] have any comments or questions on the consent on consent agenda as published.

[8:08] So moved.

[8:09] Second.

[8:09] All in favor.

[8:10] Aye.

[8:11] Aye.

[8:11] Motion carries.

[8:12] So is the Colorado Proposition 1, 2, 7, an initiative to prohibit hunting of mountain.

[8:19] Thank you Madam Chair.

[8:20] This morning's resolution is response to a citizen petition that was put on the ballots for this fall.

[8:25] This fall, Proposition 1, 2, 7, and again, this is reminiscent of the wolf proposition that was put

[8:33] on by through voters and I put wildlife populations in the state of Colorado and I think we should

[8:39] leave that the experts. There's also a lot of other impacts to our local community and I'm sure

[8:45] many of the people here today are here to speak about that. But so today's proposition is to oppose

[8:50] a proposition 127 and to leave wildlife management where it should be with the experts. Do you have any

[8:54] comments at this time? I don't know. Okay. We'll move on to public comment and please state your name to

[9:02] the record.

[9:10] President and Mason County of Mount Lyons and Predation, let's start off with a couple

[9:16] of quick stats for you that we have an average of 3,800 to 4,400 Mount Lyons in the state

[9:22] of Colorado.

[9:24] That's 197,600-wheeled deer that they eat in a year, okay?

[9:30] They estimate our deer population at 427,000 deer.

[9:33] That's more than half the deer that the state holds in their wildlife reserves.

[9:39] That's a major issue when you're talking about removing predation from the state of Colorado.

[9:45] As we know, we've already added wolves in the state of Colorado, the divisional wildlife

[9:49] in their wisdom, insanity, we have wolves, seven of them that were killing livestock,

[9:56] so they've chosen to remove those wolves into another area.

[9:59] They might as well have neutered them and expected a different result.

[10:02] They're going to get the same result.

[10:03] With mountain lines, conservation comes from the hunter.

[10:09] It comes from us.

[10:11] We need to address these issues on more of a local level

[10:15] than having the state in the divisional wildlife do this.

[10:19] If you take a look at hunting and conservation alone,

[10:22] hunting federally generates $5.3 billion in revenue.

[10:27] It states it's $3.4 billion in tax revenue.

[10:30] We're the ones paying for the mountain bike trails, the camping, the fishing, it's the hunting

[10:36] license to do that. We're the conservatives that know how to protect our wildlife and

[10:41] our way of life. So I ask that you oppose 127. In addition, I don't know if the commissioners

[10:49] are aware that we have a severe bear population in Colorado as well. The deprivation to our

[10:56] well-life is very bad. The state's estimating 17,000 to 20,000 bears. I can tell you it's 30 to 40,000.

[11:04] In Mesa County and in the Lake County or Delta County alone, they're shooting bears and putting them in a landfill.

[11:10] 40 to 50 a year. That's not good. We're not protecting our well-life. So I ask that you address this on a local level and stop the predation here.

[11:20] We should have more, not a moratorium on outlines.

[11:24] We should be out hunting them more than we are, thank you.

[11:27] Thank you very much.

[11:30] Is there any other public comment?

[11:33] Please come forward and state your name to the record.

[11:39] Morning commissioners, Brandon, six-

[15:00] I'm David Fried, founder of the Colorado Resident Hunter Association. And here in full support of your resolution today that I've reviewed thoroughly, and I appreciate you putting it together. Along with Mark, the numbers are staggering as far as if you're considering mountain lines are killing one deer a week. And we have a population of about 400,000 deer in Colorado. And if the numbers that CPW put out currently are accurate about half of those are

[15:29] are harvested each year by mountain lions

[15:31] if we have a population of 4,000 of them.

[15:34] So you can imagine the problems

[15:35] if that population of mountain lions

[15:38] doubled in a five to 10 year period.

[15:41] I agree fully with Senator Perry-Will's statement

[15:45] that ballot box biology is the absolute worst way

[15:48] to manage wildlife.

[15:50] And we're gonna see that with wolves as you know as well.

[15:54] So I do think there's one area where we could maybe lean

[15:57] on CPW, we were very active in saving over-the-counter archery for Elkunners recently.

[16:04] The CPW staff kind of changed their recommendation, and that was pivotal with that.

[16:10] I would like to see CPW staff come out with, you know, a position on ballot box biology.

[16:18] So, but we appreciate your willingness to put together the resolution, and all 1300 members

[16:23] of the Colorado Resident Hunter Association are in full support of it.

[16:27] Thank you.

[16:27] Thank you very much

[16:29] Do anyone else have public comment?

[16:32] Please come forward and say your name to the record

[16:37] Well, good morning commissioners. I'm Jody Green. I live at 392. What would have been grandchildren Colorado

[16:44] And I am in total support of you guys going against

[16:47] 127 when I was a kid used to be able to buy a sportsman's license

[16:52] It included bear mountain lion deer L. Turkeys all year species

[16:57] They don't do that anymore.

[17:00] Everything's a specialty tag anymore.

[17:03] Back then, we didn't have predatory problems

[17:06] because they were being eliminated

[17:07] to all the seasons.

[17:09] Now, you only get February.

[17:12] What is it?

[17:13] The last no-member to February to let your lions.

[17:17] So that's a very short span and very few people.

[17:20] And they're only limiting certain amount of tags in each area.

[17:24] I think they need to put out more tags myself

[17:26] because we had five different cats on film in a 10 mile radius where I was

[17:33] hunting this year. Thank you, and you have a great day. Thank you so much, sir.

[17:40] So, you want else to have public coming on this item? Please come forward and

[17:44] state your name to the record.

[17:50] Commissioner Staff, good morning. My name is John

[17:53] Howard. I'm from Grand Junction. I'm a former commissioner and two-term chair

[17:57] of Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission.

[18:00] Thank you for taking up this resolution

[18:02] and opposition to Proposition 127.

[18:06] I'm here today on behalf of the largest conservation coalition

[18:10] in the state, the Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project,

[18:15] which came together during the pollist administration,

[18:18] and is made up of 20 of the largest national state

[18:23] and local organizations.

[18:26] We don't agree on very much.

[18:29] When we work together, we often have divided votes.

[18:33] On this proposition, all 20 organizations came together

[18:37] in opposition to it.

[18:38] I won't read the whole list, but I just want you to understand

[18:41] the breadth of it.

[18:43] From left to right, national, local, and state.

[18:48] That, that country, hundreds, and anglers.

[18:51] The National Wildlife Federation.

[18:52] Ducks Unlimited, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Project, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation,

[19:00] Rocky Mountain Big Horn, the National Wild Turkey Federation, 20 organizations came together

[19:07] and I would like to put in the record for your consideration our statement on Proposition

[19:13] 127.

[19:15] A couple of things I just like to note as a former chairman of the commission, this idea came

[19:21] up twice while I was on the commission and failed both times unanimously. All the commissioners,

[19:27] again, across the political spectrum, voted against it. It also came up twice after my time

[19:34] on the commission in the legislature. Again, failed in both times. Why is that? Because scientific

[19:43] wildlife management in accordance with the North American model is absolutely important to regulate

[19:49] these species biologically and socially. That's how you get that sustainable 4,000 lion population.

[19:58] You won't get it if you don't have social tolerance on the landscape. And that's really

[20:04] the great thing that CPW is able to do and we see it in contrast to wolves is to see folks on

[20:11] the landscape tolerating this apex predator because they know it's being scientifically managed

[20:17] and they're going to get the game damage claims.

[20:20] So I ask you to go ahead and support this proposition.

[20:23] We appreciate it very much.

[20:24] Let's give CPW the flexibility to continue its success.

[20:28] Thank you.

[20:29] Thank you very much.

[20:33] Please come forward and state your name to the record.

[20:39] Courtney, my name's Dean Riggs.

[20:41] I live in Loma.

[20:42] So I am a Mesa County resident.

[20:45] I have 27 years of experience working

[20:48] with Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

[20:49] life. Retired about four years ago as a deputy regional manager here in the

[20:54] Grand Junction Office. On top of that, I've personally handled mountain lines,

[21:01] bobcats, bears, you name it. I've been involved with it from day one working

[21:06] for the agency. As well, I'm a second-generation well-life manager in the state

[21:12] Colorado. My dad worked for three or six years for the state as well too. So I'm very

[21:19] very much support this commission taking the stance of opposing this. It is without

[21:26] about bad biology, it's bad science. And in fact, this issue has nothing to do with science

[21:36] or biology. It has everything to do with the thought process that I can sit on the couch

[21:41] that my mountain. And that is absolutely not in keeping with wildlife management across

[21:48] the state of Colorado or in the United States of America. The North American model of

[21:54] wildlife conservation has been in effect for a couple hundred years in the United States

[22:00] of America. And it's done a really good job of managing wildlife without going to uninformed

[22:06] from voters at the ballot box.

[22:08] So Commissioner Davis, I very much appreciate what you said

[22:15] and wholeheartedly endorse what you said

[22:18] about ballot box biology.

[22:20] At the end of the day, we have 900 or so employees

[22:23] working in the agency that many of which have well-left degrees,

[22:28] probably over half of which we have well-left degrees

[22:31] and our experts in their field and seen as experts

[22:34] around the United States and across the world.

[22:37] So we should use that expertise.

[22:40] I often think about it from the personal perspective

[22:43] of how do you fix your plumbing at the house?

[22:47] Well, you hire a plumber.

[22:48] Well, why do you hire a plumber?

[22:49] Because the plumber is the expert in the field.

[22:52] If you can't fix it yourself, you hire the plumber.

[22:55] So we're in a situation where we need to follow

[22:58] those experts in the state of Colorado

[23:00] and get away from ballot box by all.

[23:03] Thank you.

[23:03] thank you very much. Anyone else have public comment on this item? Please come

[23:08] forward and say your name to the record. I'm

[23:15] Wendy Browning and I live in White

[23:16] Mara, Colorado. Well, we've talked a lot about deprivation, depredation of wildlife

[23:23] and informant ranch animals and while we talked about the negative impact of

[23:29] ballot box biology, I think there's something else that needs to be brought out. I

[23:36] We think that the deception in the wording of the bill needs to be flushed out.

[23:45] So trophy hunting lions is illegal in Colorado anyway.

[23:51] If you go to CPW's website, they directly conflict the allegation that too many females

[24:00] and kittens and links are being trapped accidentally.

[24:04] There have been zero lakes since 96 caught up in Bobcat trapping, zero.

[24:13] And I think that the best practices is stated by CPW knowing that the female lion is who

[24:22] is the most critical to protecting a species is best hunted by dogs.

[24:28] dogs. Instead of being exploited by dogs, best practices because if you're following

[24:35] your dogs, you're able to see whether there's kitten tracks, the size between females

[24:41] and males, and when they're treated by the dogs, it becomes blatantly obvious which

[24:47] gender you are looking at. And so I think it's fair to flesh out the hypocrisy and the

[24:56] bill. Thank you very much, ma'am. Is there any other public comment on this item? Please

[25:02] come forward and state your name to the record.

[25:13] J.J. Fletcher, I live in Palisade, I'm a candidate for a county commissioner for district

[25:18] three. We've all seen this movie evolving and colorado with ballot box wildlife management

[25:25] and first started with the bare elimination of the spring bare hunt. And now we see just

[25:31] in yesterday's news were a cub walk through a junior high school. In Colburn somebody's chickens were

[25:38] attacked. So we're being overrun by the bear population. Then the second part of the movie we see

[25:45] the introduction in the ballot box biology of the introduction of the wolf in Colorado. And we see how

[25:51] that's laid out. We've recently had to relocate the wolves to someone on location. We've lost I think

[26:00] three or four of the population of the wolves. And we continue to push the narrative, and

[26:07] on top of that, it's a political push by the first gentleman who wants to make sure

[26:13] that before Polis leaves office, that we continue to push the narrative of the wolf and

[26:20] fit the wolf against the cattle community across the state of Colorado. But chapter three,

[26:27] I think when you mix all three of the apex predators together at the end of the day with a population of around six million people in the state of Colorado

[26:37] It's just going to become

[26:39] And all out disaster

[26:42] And if we can find my state here

[26:45] Science-based wildlife management is under attack

[26:49] Proposition 127 is a dangerous ballot measure that intends to prohibit the hunting of mountain lions and bobcats and Colorado

[26:57] Proposition 127 is a blatant attempt to undermine the authority of Colorado Parks and Wildlife,

[27:03] who for decades have utilized regulated hunting as an effective tool to manage our state's mountain line and bobcat population.

[27:11] Colorado has known what's best for a wildlife, and that's to leave it to the professionals.

[27:16] Please vote no on Proposition 127 and ensure and help ensure wildlife management,

[27:23] policy stays rooted in science and not at the ballot box. Thank you for your time today.

[27:28] Thank you very much. If anyone else has public comment please come forward and say your name to

[27:34] the record.

[27:42] Good morning commissioners and staff. I'm Janie Van Winkle. Our family, our caretakers

[27:47] of the landscape in Mesa County were stewards of the livestock and the wildlife in our community

[27:53] and we're contributing members in Mesa County.

[27:57] I'm here to support the resolution to oppose the ban

[28:00] on big cat hunting on the ballot proposition 127.

[28:04] We've had a front row seat,

[28:06] luckily as a spectator at this point,

[28:09] as fellow ranchers have dealt

[28:10] with the most recent ballot box biology challenge,

[28:13] which is the challenge of woof introduction.

[28:16] Looking back over the 30 plus years of managing our wildlife

[28:20] with emotion versus science,

[28:21] We see it has not worked out well for the wildlife nor for our residents.

[28:27] 1992 we eliminated the spring bear hunt.

[28:30] We see report repeatedly incidents of bears in our community,

[28:35] mountain communities, and the bears are shot.

[28:38] Our 2021 introduction of the wolves.

[28:41] Recently we've seen several of those wolves have died.

[28:44] I'd like to share with you that a fellow rancher in Mesa County

[28:48] has had three lion depredations in the last couple of months, a 300-pound calf, a

[28:55] yearling heifer, and a young bull killed by a mountain lion. Currently I'm

[29:00] bringing this to your attention because currently CPW can manage the

[29:05] predators and ensure they're part of a balanced landscape. Hunters of mountain

[29:09] lions are required to take an online cat, online, online easy for me to say,

[29:14] online class prior to getting a tag.

[29:17] The limits are set by CPW annually and they're updated daily during the hunting season as

[29:23] part of this management program.

[29:25] We support the Mesa County commissioners as they pass the resolution to oppose the ban

[29:29] of hunting big cats in Colorado Proposition 127.

[29:35] Let CPW do the job they were hired to do.

[29:38] manage the landscapes and the wildlife with goals in mind, not emotional

[29:43] direction from uninformed folks. Thank you. Thank you very much.

[29:49] Sir, anyone else that has public comment on this item? Please come forward and

[29:54] state your name to the record.

[30:02] Good morning, commissioners. I'm John Justman. I'm from Florida. I don't have any live stock, but I look at this initiative, and it makes the county the largest egg contributed to our economy is the egg in this for the beef industry. And with the warm introduction, we're doing this not by science, but by somebody's touchy feelings about how we should manage the wildlife. And I think it should be all that be done on scientific, logical reasons of why we

[30:32] have a hunting season, which I think we can justify for the lions, and this

[30:37] spring bear hunt, I don't know if that worked out that well. The wolf initiative,

[30:42] but as I'm concerned, is the disaster, voted in by people that have no

[30:45] consequences of the wolves in their lives because they live in the city. And yet

[30:50] the people up there, my friend Mayor Linky, a commissioner from Grand County, was

[30:55] just talking about the problem that they have in their area, and they also have

[30:59] life stock you may have had some predication and the idea that we can take the wolves and

[31:05] all let's just relocate them. Yeah, they should be relocated, all right, but not in Colorado.

[31:11] And I thank you and support your efforts on this issue and thank you very much.

[31:15] Thank you very much, sir.

[31:18] Does anyone else have public comment on this item?

[31:24] Anyone else?

[31:26] Okay, we'll bring it back to the board for discussion.

[31:30] commissioners, do you have some comments that you would like to share?

[31:34] I would say I'm in full support of this. I appreciate commissioner Davis taking the lead and drafting the resolution.

[31:39] My husband would be here and would have a lot to say if it wasn't for the fact he is hunting today.

[31:45] Certainly support this.

[31:49] Yeah, Prop 20, 127 is like managing wildlife with heart emoji.

[31:55] I think it makes it a lot of people feel good with the slogan, ban trophy hunting.

[32:02] And I believe that's what many of the proponents of this are banking on is uninformed, front

[32:07] range voters who make them feel good about protecting, protecting against trophy hunting.

[32:15] But at what cost?

[32:16] I mean, imagine vanting an essential tool of wildlife management because it sounds good

[32:21] on paper.

[32:22] While the real consequences, like mountain lions co-zing up in your backyard or, you

[32:27] know, depredating half our meal, your populations get ignored.

[32:31] Again, this isn't about voting on a field-good slogan for me.

[32:34] It's about letting experts do their job.

[32:37] Let's not throw out decades of scientific research out the window in favor of, again, a ballot

[32:42] box biology.

[32:43] We need predator management, not predator mayhem.

[32:48] Yeah, thank you.

[32:50] I'm in full support of this.

[32:52] I am a hunter myself.

[32:54] I'm a six-generation Colorado native.

[32:57] And these are our resources that we're going to manage as hunters and conservationists.

[33:04] I think there's a falsehood out there that if we ban hunting

[33:12] of these animals that they're not going to be managed in some degree.

[33:17] And we've seen this with the bears, the overpopulation of the bears.

[33:21] Our CPW agents have to still manage those bears when they become a danger to our society and themselves.

[33:30] And like Mark McAllister had said, those often go in the landfill, which is devastating.

[33:35] And that's a resource that could have gone to our citizens and put food on the table for many families.

[33:40] and that's a travesty. So I really am in support of our resolution. I think

[33:46] management should be to the people of this state. We should be able to have our

[33:51] own resources. And what really this initiative is is a ban on management. This

[33:59] is a ban on the state of Colorado being able to manage our resources. And so when

[34:04] people are voting for this, they're voting to not have management. And that's really

[34:09] the issue here. And so I'm in full support of making sure that our residents and our

[34:15] state can manage our wildlife properly and we will now move, you know, all entertain

[34:23] a motion to approve item as entered the record.

[34:25] So moved.

[34:26] Second.

[34:27] All in favor.

[34:28] Aye.

[34:29] Motion carries.

[34:36] We'll just pause that you guys want to take off. We want to stick around.

[34:40] If you have things to do, you can leave.

[34:44] Thank you.

[34:44] We're not riveting agenda, though.

[34:47] Thank you guys so much for your engagement.

[34:50] We appreciate you.

[34:59] The second item meeting consideration today is consider probing a contract between

[35:04] Mesa County Public Health and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment

[35:09] for the special supplemental nutritional program for women, infant, and children, WIC.

[35:16] In the amount of $653,398 and we have Carla Claim, our WIC manager here to present today.

[35:25] Good morning.

[35:26] Good morning, commissioners.

[35:28] Thank you for considering this grant.

[35:30] The contract is the beginning of a five-year agreement.

[35:33] WIC is an ongoing federally funded supplemental nutrition program.

[35:38] This purpose is to safeguard the health of low-income women, infants, and children who are at nutrition risk.

[35:43] We have a staff of 10 that administer this program.

[35:47] The program provides nutritious foods, nutrition education, breastfeeding support, and healthcare

[35:53] referrals.

[35:54] It serves pregnant, postpartum, and breastfeeding women, infants and children up to the age

[35:59] of five.

[36:01] WIC outcome data helps ensure infants and children's normal growth, reduces levels of anemia, increases

[36:08] immunization rates improves access to regular health care and social services and improves quality

[36:14] of diets. The Colorado WIC program at CDPHE will review monthly caselo reports, the annual

[36:23] nutrition education plan evaluation, and results of fiscal and program monitoring activities to

[36:29] determine program performance and effectiveness. And this contract was approved by the Board of Health

[36:34] on September 10th.

[36:36] Thank you so much.

[36:37] Commissioner, do you have questions or comments?

[36:40] It's a great program.

[36:41] I'm glad we're planning for the pending.

[36:42] Thank you.

[36:43] Great job.

[36:44] Wonderful program on this.

[36:45] Yeah, thank you so much.

[36:47] Is there anyone in the public that has comments

[36:50] or questions on this item?

[36:55] Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to approve

[36:57] the item as entered into the record.

[36:59] So moved.

[37:00] Second.

[37:00] All in favor?

[37:01] Aye.

[37:02] Aye.

[37:02] Motion carries.

[37:03] The third item needing consideration today

[37:06] is consider proving a contract between Mesa County Public Health and the Colorado Department

[37:10] of Early Childhood for the Child Development Associate Scholarship Program for the partnership

[37:16] for children and families in the amount of $150,000 and authorize the public health director

[37:21] to sign.

[37:22] We do have Stephanie Bivens, our partnership for children and families director here to

[37:27] present.

[37:28] Good morning.

[37:28] Good morning commissioners.

[37:30] Thank you for having me.

[37:31] This project is intended to increase the number of early childhood professionals with the

[37:35] CDA or the Child Development Associate certification.

[37:40] It's targeted on new teachers as well as increases our ability to have Spanish speaking candidates

[37:50] that can serve as lead teachers for our classrooms.

[37:53] So this ensures that families have access to high quality childcare settings in Mesa County

[37:58] and in Colorado the CDA credential allows professionals to be that early childhood teacher in a licensed

[38:04] child care program. This contract covers the cost to provide coaching and support the

[38:09] CDA candidates with including supplies, mileage, reimbursement, the testing that they have

[38:15] to go through for certification. Quarterly reports are submitted, including information

[38:20] about the number of child care programs participating, number of apprenticeships participating and

[38:27] demographics as well as other relevant information for our tracking.

[38:33] This is a new contract serving as a follow-up from the Colorado Shines Brighter Project

[38:38] that has been in place since 2020.

[38:42] The previous amount awarded to PCF was $956,000 through September 30, 2024 and this new contract

[38:56] So the direct period is from September 1st, 2024 through December 31st, 2026, and this contract was also approved by the Board of Health on 910.

[39:07] Thank you so much. Commissioner, do you have any comments or questions?

[39:11] It's another great program.

[39:12] Yeah, thank you.

[39:14] Thank you.

[39:14] Thank you. Does anyone in the public have any comments or questions on this item?

[39:22] Seeing none will entertain a motion to approve the item as entered into the record.

[39:26] So moved.

[39:27] Second.

[39:27] All in favor?

[39:29] Aye.

[39:29] Motion carries.

[39:31] The fourth item meeting consideration today is consider approving a contract between

[39:35] Mace County Public Health and the National Forest Foundation for Non-Motorized Trail

[39:39] Maintenance on the Grand Mesa on Compagray and the Gunnison National Forest in the amount

[39:44] of $100,000 and $4,000, $460.

[39:48] Sorry.

[39:49] $104,460.

[39:51] We do have Russ Middleton, our trails coordinator here to present today.

[39:55] Good morning.

[39:55] Good morning, commissioners. Yes, Ross Svetlman, Charles Gornier with Public Health.

[40:00] This is the fourth year of a contract we've had with the National Forest Foundation.

[40:04] This is funding generated through the Great American Health Doors Act,

[40:08] it was passed by Senator Gardner a few years ago, and that funding is here marked for maintenance

[40:13] on federal lands. So our local GMO, the office, and the Grand Valley Ranger Districts,

[40:19] funnels those. Dollars to the National Forest Foundation, they put out in RFP,

[40:23] We submitted a proposal back in the spring and we were awarded this contract to carry out trail maintenance on the little creek trail on the

[40:31] up in Pagrae and the Canne Creek Trail on the Grand Mesa and that funding goes directly towards

[40:37] salary, vehicle equipment for our trail through our five member trail through and upon completion of the project we submit

[40:46] invoices for work performed and we are reimbursed and it's been a good partnership for

[40:52] for first four years and we hope to continue it for a couple more years after this.

[40:57] Having questions?

[40:58] Thank you so much.

[40:59] Commissioner, is there any questions?

[41:00] I don't have any questions.

[41:01] Thank you, Russ.

[41:02] Thank you.

[41:03] Yeah.

[41:03] We appreciate your work, Russ.

[41:05] Does anyone in the public have any comments or questions on this item?

[41:10] Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to approve the item as interim to the record.

[41:14] So moved.

[41:14] Second.

[41:15] All in favor?

[41:16] Aye.

[41:17] Motion carries.

[41:18] The fifth item needing consideration today is consider approving a contract between Mesa County

[41:23] Public Health and the Department of Local Affairs for the Community Service Block Grant in the amount of $178,271 and we do have Michelle Trujillo or Health Promotion Division Director here to present today.

[41:36] Good morning.

[41:37] Good morning.

[41:38] Thank you for having me here today.

[41:40] The Community Services Block Grant provides funds to Mesa County Public Health through the partnership for children and families and Grand Valley Connects to alleviate the causes and conditions of poverty in our community.

[41:51] CSBG funding will be used to support their early care and education infrastructure in our

[41:57] community and to support low-income families and individuals for improved economic stability.

[42:03] Poverty will be reduced by promoting school readiness and increasing economic opportunity

[42:08] among vulnerable families and individuals by connecting them to program services and resources

[42:13] for which they may be eligible.

[42:14] The CSBG is managed by a tripartite advisory committee,

[42:20] partnership for children and families, and Grand Valley Connects report to the committee on a bi-monthly basis.

[42:26] This is the start of a new contract that's effective January 1, 2024 through September 30th, 2027.

[42:33] The initial awarded amount was $22,419 with some additional funds in the amount of $38,951.

[42:43] 27,766 and 89,135 awarded through option letters and I should add we just recently received

[42:51] a fourth option letter in the amount of $1,801 bringing the total to $180,072.

[42:59] This contract was approved by the Board of Public Health on September 10th of this year.

[43:05] Great.

[43:05] Thank you, Michelle.

[43:06] Michelle, commissioner, is she having any comments or questions?

[43:09] I'm on the CSBG board and this is a good amount of money that comes to our community but

[43:13] Michelle earns every penny of it.

[43:15] It's a federal grant and has so many hoops to jump through and she jumps through all of

[43:19] them.

[43:19] So thank you for your time.

[43:21] Thank you.

[43:22] Thank you so much, Michelle.

[43:23] Does anyone in the public have comments or questions on this item?

[43:28] Okay.

[43:29] Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to approve the item as entered into the record.

[43:33] So moved.

[43:33] Second.

[43:34] All in favor?

[43:35] Aye.

[43:35] I motion carries.

[43:38] So the sixth item needing consideration today is consider

[43:40] prepping a contract between Mace County Public Health and

[43:42] Collar Department of Public Health and Environment for the

[43:46] overdose data to action program in the amount of $240,000 and we

[43:52] do have Michelle here to present again.

[43:54] Okay.

[43:55] This is the beginning of a five year contract and this contract

[43:58] serves to impact health and communities across Colorado by

[44:02] reducing opioid overdoses.

[44:03] Similar to the rest of the state, substance use related illness and injury are a public health problem in Mesa County.

[44:11] This project serves to increase access to and awareness of services and resources for people who use drugs in Mesa County

[44:18] and to provide community education on overdose prevention and harm reduction.

[44:23] This health project will decrease morbidity and mortality related to substance use in overdose in Mesa County.

[44:29] Through this project, Mesa County Public Health will expand existing resource

[44:34] navigation programming to provide services to the PWUD population.

[44:40] Increase access to Naloxone and fentanyl test strips, increase knowledge of

[44:45] harm reduction and harm reduction services available in the community and

[44:49] decrease stigma against PWUD. The progress reports and data are to be submitted

[44:55] throughout the contract period from July 1, 2024, through August 30th.

[45:00] First, 2025, and this contract was approved by Board of Public Health on September 10th of this year. Thank you, Michele. Commissioners, you have comments or questions on this item? I don't. No, just a huge problem with, and this is good resources for this issue, so thank you again for your kindness. Does anyone in the public have any comments or questions on this item?

[45:21] Okay. Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to approve the item as introduced in the record. Second. All in favor. Aye. I motion carries. The seventh item meeting consideration today is

[45:31] consider approving a contract and lease agreement with MBE Transportation Inc. for the not-to-exceed

[45:38] amount of $14,6,958 for start-up costs in three-year base term to be reviewed annually

[45:46] subject to funding availability for an estimated total annual review hours of 62,000 and authorized

[45:54] a chair to sign.

[45:55] We do have Dana Brosek, our TPO director here today to present.

[45:59] Good morning.

[45:59] Thank you.

[46:00] Good morning, Dana Bursle, the RTPO director.

[46:02] So yeah, this item is for the Grand Valley Transit Operations Contract.

[46:06] Grand Valley Transit or DVT has been operated by transdev since 2017 in late 2023 transdev

[46:13] requested not to continue on the option years due to the rising costs of the current contract.

[46:21] RTPO staff released an RFP in May of 2024 for the new operations contract with three base

[46:27] years and for option years starting January 1st, 2025. This contract includes all the staff

[46:33] basically to run Grand Valley Transit as well as insurance for the buses. They do lease

[46:39] the first floor of our facility which we then pay back. So that's where there's a lease agreement

[46:44] as part of this. We formed an evaluation committee that included staff from Ace of County,

[46:49] the cities of Grand Junction and Fudah as well as our TPO staff. We received four proposals

[46:54] and these were evaluated and the top three firms were interviewed.

[46:59] The evaluation criteria included qualifications, experience and past performance,

[47:03] organizational structure, understanding of the scope of work and transition plan,

[47:08] and pricing which was scored separately with the original proposal.

[47:14] MB Transportation Inc. had the highest score overall in their original proposal

[47:18] with the cost as well as when we added in the interview, invest in final offer.

[47:24] We checked references on MBE, checked three different transit agencies who were listed as a reference

[47:31] one was not, and they all had good things to say about MBE. The start-up costs will be included

[47:36] in some of our grant funding we have in 2024. And the operations will be paid with our allocations

[47:43] from the Federal Transit Administration and through an IGA with Mesa County, the cities of Grand

[47:47] and Junction of Fruda and the Tana Palisane.

[47:50] The first year of the contract is for just over 4.4 million

[47:55] for 62,000 operating hours.

[47:58] And as it says in the agenda,

[48:00] the total three year contract is for over 14 million.

[48:04] The evaluation committee recommended moving forward

[48:06] with MV, we also met with all the area managers

[48:09] because it is funded through that IGA.

[48:12] They also recommended moving forward

[48:14] with MV transportation.

[48:15] We had also a public meeting and an executive session with the GBRTC, the Grand Valley Regional

[48:23] Transportation Committee, which Commissioner Davis is part of, and they also recommended

[48:28] moving forward with MB and so what that here we are, with the contract, we do have representation

[48:35] from MB here who I believe wants to say some words, but yeah, we're looking forward to finishing

[48:42] this process and starting the transition with them taking over the operations January,

[48:50] actually second because we don't have service on January 1st, but for January 1st.

[48:56] Yes, thank you, Dana. We appreciate you so much. Commissioner, do you have comments or questions

[49:00] on those? No, it's been a long time. You guys have been working on this for a while, safe

[49:05] some money, and I think we got a great provider, so thank you for all your work on this, Dana.

[49:08] Thank you.

[49:09] Thank you.

[49:09] Anyone in the public have any comments or questions on this item?

[49:13] Please come forward and sit your name to the record.

[49:22] Good morning commissioners.

[49:23] My name is Peter Greenberg.

[49:24] I'm the vice president for business development with MB Transportation.

[49:28] I'm really here this morning to thank you for the opportunity to serve the community.

[49:32] He also wants it to commit that MB Transportation will be implementing everything that was in

[49:36] our proposal and adhere very strictly to the contract which we're looking forward to signing

[49:41] you implementing. Thank you so much. Does anyone else have public comment at this time?

[49:49] Please come forward and say your name to the record.

[49:56] Good morning, commissioners. My name is

[49:58] Juan Pushman, senior vice president for trans stuff. We've had the honor of the last eight years

[50:02] operating your your local bus service and it's been a true privilege working with your local staff

[50:06] and folks and I can't say enough how proud I am of my local team for being here and how they've

[50:11] operated the service. I think they've done tremendous job getting us through the pandemic and all

[50:15] of the things that have happened.

[50:16] And as Ms. Brosek said, we came to the county asking

[50:20] to be out of the contract, because we are losing money

[50:23] to be here.

[50:24] And it's due to all the rising costs

[50:26] that have happened through the pandemic and things.

[50:29] And so we went through the process of doing this,

[50:32] and we were very sorely disappointed

[50:33] that we were not selected to be your provider

[50:36] for the next number of years.

[50:39] But I just wanted to be here to be on the record

[50:41] that the the price difference was about three little over $300,000 in most of that most all of that is in the variable rate

[50:49] Which is 100% drivers wages and benefits and V has committed as you just heard that they would provide a dollar five more per hour

[50:59] To each driver that we are currently paying that we have proposed that we are currently paying and so that leads that they would be about another

[51:07] $9,800 or $80,000 more than our price of wages and so it makes the benefits about $400,000

[51:20] less than what we're paying for benefits for the employees.

[51:24] So the employees will be hurt by about $8,000 per person for the cost of their benefits unless

[51:29] they've got a heck of a benefit program that we can't get priced that low.

[51:33] So, my suggestion here is that they may be coming back or they would like to come back and

[51:38] look for more money to pay for the benefits if things get tight with their union negotiations

[51:42] and such.

[51:44] And I would just like to be on the record that they won this contest.

[51:48] We were highest recommendation or highest scored before prices put into it.

[51:52] So this was solely one on the price.

[51:54] So if they were to come back, I would expect that this board would not approve a price increase

[51:59] for them.

[52:00] they would have to go out to bid just like we requested the honorable thing.

[52:03] Thank you so much and we will, we committed to making a good transition process.

[52:09] We'll work with MV and with Ms. Brosek and her team to make sure that we leave inappropriately.

[52:17] Thank you so much.

[52:18] Thank you so much.

[52:18] We appreciate your goodwill towards this project.

[52:23] Can anyone else have public comment on this item?

[52:26] Okay.

[52:31] Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to approve the item as entered into the record.

[52:35] So moved.

[52:35] Second.

[52:36] All in favor?

[52:37] Aye.

[52:38] Motion carries.

[52:40] The eighth item needing consideration today is authorizing staff to apply for the state

[52:45] of Colorado underfunded courthouse facility grant in the amount of $1,575,000.

[52:52] We do have Alec Anderson, our operations manager here to present today.

[52:56] Good morning, Alec.

[52:56] Good morning, commissioners.

[52:58] Allic Anderson, operations manager with Mesa County.

[53:00] So as you're aware, we spent the last three years

[53:04] for so working with the 21st Judicial District

[53:06] to prepare various functions

[53:08] to accommodate some of their space needs, right?

[53:11] They're a growing entity.

[53:12] We need more justice services in the area.

[53:14] They continue to expand with new judges,

[53:16] new judicial staff, new probation staff.

[53:19] And so we've been working to facilitate that space need.

[53:23] We've done a couple of different things

[53:25] in the last few years, including renovating space at our central services location to allow

[53:29] probation to move into that area, allowing them to have a better 20-year plan for their

[53:33] staffing needs. As we're able to do that, we have, and are currently designing two court

[53:39] rooms in the existing Justice Center. We intend to begin construction efforts on one courtroom

[53:44] in the next couple of months. We're currently at the bid for that process. That said, getting

[53:49] that additional courtroom gets us to base. Essentially, we'll have enough court rooms for all the judges

[53:54] is the 21st currently has, but it doesn't really future proof us.

[53:59] So to that effect, we'd like to apply for this state grant, again in the amount of $1,575,000

[54:05] to fund the design of an annex of the existing Justice Center at 125 North Spruce Read, and

[54:12] that will truly provide us sufficient room for all judicial functions.

[54:16] So what we propose to design is a approximately 100,000 square foot four-story facility.

[54:23] This would include room for the DA, district attorney, sheriff's office, and then two floors dedicated so late to judicial courthouse services.

[54:32] Thank you. I'll come assure you I'm going to comments or questions on the thing.

[54:35] Remind me when this is due and when will be notified if we are granted the award.

[54:40] Sure thing. So this is going to be due September 30th. So next week, we should be notified either very late this year or early next.

[54:50] I just say, you know, for years we've been battling an overpopulation and over jail population, and we've done a lot in the last few years to try to reduce that.

[54:58] And another component of that is to making sure we have people who are getting quick and efficient hearings before the courts.

[55:05] And on our side that means accommodating new judges in the future so that we can continue to do that.

[55:09] This is going to be a big ticket item in the future, but this is what this grandest design to do is design and plan for that.

[55:15] I think this is a good step forward in that.

[55:19] I appreciate our team working on hard on this.

[55:23] This is part of our duties here at County by statue.

[55:28] We do need to provide our justice service a place to be.

[55:34] And thanks for leading this effort with this grant.

[55:37] We really appreciate it.

[55:39] Is there any public comment on this item?

[55:40] Okay.

[55:43] Okay. Seeing none I'll entertain a motion to approve the item as

[55:46] entered in the record. So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Motion carries.

[55:56] So is it we're going to 10 now?

[56:00] The last one which would be number nine.

[56:02] Number nine. That's right. So the ninth item needing consideration

[56:07] today is approving a Mesa County Behavioral Health request to

[56:12] to apply for the pioneering ideas,

[56:15] building a culture of health grant

[56:17] in the amount of $450,000 and we do have Jenna Kaufman,

[56:21] our deputy director of behavioral health here

[56:23] to present today.

[56:25] Good morning, Jenna.

[56:25] Good morning, commissioners.

[56:26] Again, Jenna Kaufman, behavioral health deputy director.

[56:30] I'm here to request the consideration

[56:32] for the pioneer ideas grant for 40050

[56:36] through the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

[56:39] This grant will support the expansion of the MAC organizations, increasing the capacity

[56:45] from 270 to 400 individuals.

[56:48] These individuals represent some of our most vulnerable population in our community,

[56:53] and the funding will allow to extend the services to better fit these populations.

[56:59] Thank you, Jenna.

[56:59] Commissioner, do you have any questions or comments?

[57:02] This is a critical program and I'm glad we found another grant to help support it, so thank

[57:06] you.

[57:06] Thank you, Jenna.

[57:08] Does anyone in the public have any comments or questions on this item?

[57:14] Seeing none I'll entertain a motion to approve the item as injured in the record. Second all in favor. I

[57:20] motion carries

[57:22] Sir any other business to come before the board?

[57:26] Okay, seeing none we are adjourned

Board of Commissioners Administrative Hearing

Agenda

Transcript