Good evening. Good evening. Lively crowd members. Could everyone please make their way to their seats? Council member Henkel, that’s you. Thank you. Good evening, and welcome to the August 11th, 2026 Broomfield Council meeting. Information on how to watch, attend and participate, as well as agendas, minutes and recordings can be found on Broomfield website at Broomfield Council meetings.
Public comment is welcome, both in person or through our call in service instructions for calling in or available on the Council Meetings webpage. Public comment will be limited to 90 minutes total per item. The first one through 15 participants in the queue have three minutes to speak.
The next 16 through 25 have two minutes, and if time remains, the next 26 plus participants have one minute to speak. For our hard of hearing residents present, we have wireless headsets available in the back of the council chambers through our AV team. The council regular meeting is called to order.
Council member McKenzie is attending remotely, so there are nine council members in attendance. A quorum of the council is present. We begin this meeting by acknowledging that we gather on the ancestral and unceded lands of the Arapaho, Cheyenne, Ute and other native peoples.
Indigenous peoples have cared for this land for generations, and they continue to maintain deep cultural and spiritual ties to it. As the City and County of Broomfield, we recognize the responsibility to honor this legacy and the enduring presence of native communities. May this acknowledgement inspire action that fosters greater understanding, truth, and respect for indigenous peoples. Thank you.
Will everyone please rise and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Amen. Thanks again.
In an effort to keep order for tonight’s meeting, I ask council members to limit their comments to five minutes. If council members are given an opportunity to speak for a second time, they should limit their communications to two minutes and we’ll plan on a ten minute break at approximately 8 p.m., we’ll begin with council’s review and approval of this evening’s agenda.
Council may add or remove items from the consent agenda, or council may revise the order of business for the meeting. Does any member of the council have any comments or questions regarding this evening’s agenda? Seeing none, are there any objections to this agenda being approved? All right. The agenda is approved.
Our first item under Petitions and Communications this evening is a proclamation declaring August 17th, 2026 as National Nonprofit Day. Will the representatives here to accept the proclamation please make their way to the podium? And thank you all for joining us this evening. I see the yellow shirts, and I’ll now summarize the proclamation. Local community organizations in Broomfield provide essential health, human, cultural, scientific and artistic services that greatly benefit residents.
Each year, many of these organizations apply for grant funding from the city and county to continue offering programs that support health, safety, and overall well-being of the community. Nonprofits play a vital role in meeting critical community needs, including support for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, mental health care, emergency assistance, cultural and educational programs, making
Broomfield a more diverse, safe and welcoming place. The city and county partners with and funds numerous organizations such as A&E avenues, Clinic of Family Health and Wellness, Broomfield Fish, the Broomfield Community Foundation, and many other dedicated agency whose agencies whose tireless efforts are essential to the well-being of our residents.
Therefore, as mayor, I hereby declare and proclaim August 17th, 2026, as National Nonprofit Day in Broomfield and urge our residents to recognize and support the contributions of our nonprofit organizations and their dedicated staff and volunteers who are essential partners in building a stronger, healthier, and more vibrant community for all.
I would like to toss it over to our nonprofit partners to make some remarks. Thank you. Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem Council members and community members. My name is Mandy Walker, and I’m the nonprofit and community engagement manager for the Department of Human Services. You can switch to the next slide, please.
I’m honored to be here today to talk about the nonprofits in our community. These are organizations that play a vital role in supporting the well-being of our community. Our nonprofit partners are at the heart of community Impact in Broomfield.
Their trauma informed wraparound services from housing and food, access to mental health and youth support are essential to meeting people where they are and helping them thrive. None of this would be possible without strong partnerships. We’re proud to support these organizations through the Department of Human Services nonprofit grants program that funded 63 nonprofit organizations in 2026, totaling over $1.8 million. With collaboration from the Broomfield Community Foundation.
And Diane West is here today with the Broomfield Community Foundation. However, the real story is incredible difference our community nonprofits make each day. We’re honored to walk alongside them as core partners in building a stronger, more connected community. Every day, these nonprofits meet urgent needs, whether it’s housing, food, mental health support, advocacy, or youth programs.
They’re often the first call when a resident is facing a crisis and they stay connected long after helping people rebuild and thrive. We and Human Services are grateful for their partnership and proud to stand alongside them. Tonight’s proclamation is a way to publicly say, we see you. We appreciate you in Broomfield is stronger because of you.
Thank you to every nonprofit staff member, volunteer and leader who helps make our city a place of dignity and opportunity for all. And then if you could switch to the next slide, we just wanted to note that on Thursday, our nonprofit grant application process opens.
And so if interested parties are, they can find information at Broomfield or. And then also you might be familiar with the Broomfield Community Services Network. It’s a monthly meeting of local organizations. The next meeting is September 9th. If anybody’s interested in attending. Thank you so much for this time. Thank you, miss Mark. Would anyone else like to speak, please? Come on up. No.
None of you. Well, we do allow public comment. If anyone in the public would like to speak on this proclamation, you’re welcome to come up to the podium. For more. Um. I, like many nonprofits. I spend a lot of my money on nonprofits.
Of course, our tax money goes to nonprofits, so it gets bent again. But I need to remind everybody, not all nonprofits are equal, and you need to educate yourself if you want to give more to the nonprofits. Uh, even in Broomfield, we don’t. Nonprofits are great.
But even in Broomfield, we’ve had a couple of the nonprofits that went away with their way of taking care of the monies or not using it for what it was supposed to be used for. So I’m just saying, educate yourself on the nonprofits.
There’s millions of nonprofits, and I do mean that, um, I have worked with over 30 of them in the last year, and when you go hunting for their numbers and stuff, there’s millions of them. So please educate yourself. But yes, nonprofits are good, but not all of them. Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak, please? Come on up to the podium. State your name and neighborhood for the record, and limit your comments to three minutes, please.
Hi, my name is Steve Palmer. I’m a resident of Broomfield. Excuse me. I just want to say that this community is quite open and generous, and I applaud your efforts and your hearts. Thank you. Thank you, thank you very much. Anyone else? Well coming up. Okay. Great. Anyone’s thinking about it.
You can kind of get over there. Work your way. Hi. I’m mercy with the Broomfield Early Childhood Council, one of the many amazing nonprofits here in Broomfield.
And as a resident in Ward one, I just want to say thank you to the city and county, and for all of the partners and nonprofits that we work with, and that we are an amazing collaborative community amongst the nonprofits. And we couldn’t do the work we do without you and without everybody in this room. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I wasn’t planning on sharing. I’m Kathy Escobar with the refuge. Um, but I just wanted to take a minute and say thank you.
And I want to say thank you to the amazing partners in this room, because the nonprofit community in Broomfield worked together every day to meet the needs in this community with love and gratitude that we get to like, we are so thankful that we get to do this work.
And so when you support us, when you support us, it helps us keep going. We’re going to do it no matter what. But what we need is this we need ongoing support and valuing the unique and amazing need that we all met, that we all need.
And so I mainly just want to say thank you to the people that every day we talk to each other and keep on doing what we want to do. And there’s many that are represented today. Um, 63 and Broomfield Rocks, that’s all. Thank you. Anyone else? All right. I’ll go to my council colleagues. Council member Peterson.
I am delighted to see so many familiar faces in the audience. And I just wanted to thank you for the amazing array of quality programs you provide and making them accessible to not just the ones that can afford them, but to everyone.
I am proud to be a part of a community that prioritizes performances, parties, resources, education, and basic necessities for all. So thank you. I also want to give a shout out to, uh, 100 women who care and guys who give uh, who quarterly, uh, gather their resources to provide additional funding to our local nonprofits. Thanks. Thank you. Council member Henkel.
Thank you. Mayor. Thank you all for being here. Um, many times when I talk to other communities, I brag about our nonprofit support here in Broomfield because a lot of other cities and counties do not have this, uh, in particularly, I invited a Denver City Council member to
come to one of our housing meetings, and he was just really enthralled with how organized those who care about our housing needs are, you know, and how we’ve been able to come together. Um, it can be very easy to, um, you know, sort of fight over all of the resources.
But we are a shared area where we know that we have shared priorities. And I just really appreciate that. In addition to that, our Broomfield Community Foundation is essential to Broomfield. A lot of other counties do not have what we have here in Broomfield. And in that nonprofit space.
People ask us how we do things. You know, how do you resettle refugees? How are you guys serving people? And we say, well, we communicate the need to. And I think, Dana, you’re very good at this as well. A lot of you are. And just communicating the need.
And I think that that’s important and advocate for our, our most vulnerable. And I feel like our staff does it as well. The answer to our Medicaid needs and to those who really want to work with our nonprofits. So BCF and Mandi, you know how I feel about you. I think you’re wonderful.
Um, and thank you all so much for being here tonight. And we love to celebrate our nonprofits. Thanks. Thank you. Anybody else? I would just like to echo my colleagues. We really couldn’t do it without this partnership. We rely on you all so much, especially for filling gap services.
And really creating a space for for folks who don’t have a place to go. And you know what I’m talking about. So I’m my gratitude is for you and you and all of you for continuing to engage and mobilize when we need that and to take care of our residents that are the most vulnerable. So thank you.
Would you guys like to take a group picture since you’re all so shiny in your yellow in front of the dais? Let’s do it. Oh. Thank you. Thank you. So. Yeah, we got it. Oh, okay. Great. I saw the shoes are too tall. Are you shoes? That’s great. Robert. All right, you ready? One. Two. Three. So. Yeah. Great.
All right. Thank you all for that. All right. So next, under petitions and communications this evening is a proclamation declaring August 24th through 28th, 2026 as Smart Week in Broomfield. Will the representatives here please make their way to the podium? And I’ll now summarize the proclamation.
Gun violence is the leading cause of death for children and teens in the US, and the city and County of Broomfield is committed to ensuring a safe environment for all children each day. Preventable tragedies occur when children access unsecured firearms.
Research shows that storing guns unloaded, locked and separate from ammunition is the most effective way to prevent access. Despite this, many firearms remain unsecured in homes, putting millions of children at risk. Improper storage can lead to accidental shootings or firearms being stolen and used for crimes.
Broomfield recognizes its responsibility to protect public safety and supports the efforts of schools, hospitals, agencies and organizations working to prevent gun related injuries and deaths. The city and county commends the Be Smart program and supports Smart Week as a vital initiative to raise awareness to promote secure gun storage. What our representative like to make any remarks? Yes. You did a great job summarizing. So thank you for that. Um, thank you again, Mayor Castaneda.
Uh, Mayor Pro Tem Lim and council members for your continued dedication to secure firearm storage awareness. And for this proclamation acknowledging smart week. I’m Leslie O’Brien. I’m a volunteer with Be Smart here in the state of Colorado and a resident of Broomfield. 80023.
Um, um, so just to remind everyone who may not know about Be Smart, it’s an acronym. So I will tell you what it stands for. S is securing all guns in your homes and vehicles and is modeling responsible behavior around guns. A is asking about the presence of unsecured guns and others homes.
Um R is recognizing the role of guns in suicide, and T is telling others to be smart. So as Mayor Castro already said, uh, you should store your firearms unloaded, locked, and separate from ammunition. I encourage all of you and all of you at home, everyone, to tell five people about secure firearm storage.
Um, I want to take you to do this in the next 24 hours. I want it to be a call, a text, a tag, whatever. Um, but I think that that is going to continue to normalize the safety conversation and continue to keep our kids and our community safe. Thank you. Thank you so much, miss O’Brien.
We do allow public comment if anyone else would like to speak on this proclamation, not seeing anyone. Then we’ll go to council. Do any of my colleagues have any remarks? Council member Henkel. I’ll keep this really quick.
I just really appreciate all of your work and for being here tonight, and Leslie, for really reminding us every year that this is something that we really need to keep talking about. Uh, gun safety is a nonpartisan issue. Um, keeping them locked up is just something that you’re just trained on as a gun owner. And I just think it’s really important, the work that you all do. So thank you for being here.
All right. Thank you. Anyone else? I have to give you the proclamation. Leslie. All right. The final item under Petitions and Communications this evening is an invitation and information from the Broomfield Open Space Foundation regarding Nature Fest 2026, with representatives from the Open Space Foundation.
Please come to the podium and introduce yourselves and tell us about this event. Yes. Hi. Thank you, Council and Mayor for your time. I’m Tara Linehan. I live in Broomfield Heights and I’m joined by my foundation colleague Pascal Freed. Freed? We’re good friends. Yes.
Um, we want to invite you and everyone who’s listening and here to our third annual Nature Fest this Saturday from 9 to 12. This is a celebration of everything nature. It’s free. There are lots of great organizations that will be there. Um, and if you can go to the next slide, that is a little bit more information. You can find more information on Broomfield Open Space Foundation.
Um, it’s going to be at Metzger Farms, and it’s a really great way to see the farmstead. If you haven’t had a chance to walk around and see, you know, the old farmhouses and, um, we’ll have, you know, birding like, so you can see the herons and it’s just going to be amazing. Um, storytelling. So if you could go to the next slide, please.
Um, we have a photo contest. We have a calendar that actually the photos, we we wrap this up, but if you want to look for us at Broomfield Days this year, we will have our 2027 calendar that supports open space in Broomfield.
And next one, I just want to tell you a little bit about who we are as the Open Space Foundation. We support the Broomfield Open Space and Trails Department. Our great friends who are here, um, and we do that.
We our mission is to protect, enhance and promote Broomfield open spaces, trails and wildlife so that we can enjoy diverse natural places today and in the future. And I wanted to point out a few of the programs that we support. The Broomfield Nature program. We support native seed plantings, and that is happening all over Broomfield. It’s really exciting.
Um, the annual fishing derby at preschool, nature walks, uh, we restore grasslands and remove and help remove invasive species. We help support Broomfield Trails Day. We offer open houses at Metzger Farms during the summer so that people can have the, uh, you know, the ability to come and see Metzger, and we help the city collaboratively put on this open space speaker series.
And that’s a virtual, um, virtual speaker series that will resume in the fall. So stay tuned for more information. Um, is there anything you want to. Add? The only. Thing I would add is that this event on Saturday is very family friendly. Yes, the intention is really to get that energy going.
And for really people, the kids and families, the individuals to go back out and go. I’ve not been to this open space. Let me go to another one. Yes. Wonderful. Well it’s exciting I’ve been before and I’m very excited to go again. I hope everybody gets a chance to go out there and check it out.
So much work goes into it, and so many people come to participate. So. Yeah, it’s a really fun event. You guys. Work hard. On it. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, and thank you very much for this time.
Well, hang out because we’re going to see if there’s public comments first and if there’s any questions from council anyone would like to speak on this item. All right then how about my colleagues. Uh, anyone want to add anything? Okay, I made you wait. Oh, yes. Good. Councilmember twist. Thank you. Um, I went last year, and it was amazing.
Um, I walked there from my house and where I’ve lived for ten years and discovered that there was a community garden space behind all the fences that I had no idea was there for a decade. So that was exciting. Um, it was a really, really wonderful day, so well put together, so many informative booths and things. I would really encourage people to go.
Um, I will be there again. Um, I’m wondering, will you have the native plant sale for donation? Yes we will. That was a real hit last year.
So we have native plants that you can, you know, it’s a fundraiser, so you can, um, you know, go home with them and leave us a donation for them. And so we will have many. I mean, probably 200. Wow. So, yeah, but they go quickly. So I’ll just put that out there. And I think there the suggestion is $5. Um, but yeah, there’s lots of great groups out there. So much to learn. Everything’s free, which we really, really love.
Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. I will see you Saturday morning. Early to get plants. Thank you. This one’s first pick of the plants. Um, anyone else on council? Well, I think I think the garden is interesting because when I serve on the Open Space Foundation with Westminster for Metzger Farm.
And I believe that garden was a student project. Yes, yes, it was the school across the street. And they had the irrigation system working again. And it’s part of a class to to learn. It’s part of a group called grit. And it’s students who are taking care of this.
Um, I should that actually reminded me that I should mention that Westminster is also a part of this, and they’re also helping us sponsor this event. Um, everything we actually do at Metzger Farms is sponsored by both Broomfield and Westminster. So, yeah. We share the fun. Yes, share the fun. It’s an amazing collaboration, really.
I agree. Well, thank you all so much in advance. We can’t wait to see you on Saturday. All right. All right. Moving on to the council member report section. Does any member of the council have any reports or updates this evening? Council member Peterson.
Well, because we moved our meetings last week, I had the opportunity to attend National Night Out. Uh, last week. And, uh, which was very fun. And while I was there, I met with, um, Officer Holt, um, with the Broomfield PD, and I was able to talk with him about the blue envelope program, and he offered to bring me some.
And so for those of you that are not familiar, this is a program that Broomfield has been involved in for over a year now. And with these envelopes, uh, anyone can go and pick them up from the police department, and, uh, you can keep them in your car or your backpack or whatever.
And then if you have a police encounter, like you get pulled over, um, this has specific instructions for how the police can best interact with you personally. And so there are ways of indicating if you are hard of hearing or you need an interpreter.
If you’re nonverbal and, um, advice for how you can interact with the police as well, such as keeping your hands visible and not reaching for things without permission, things like that. And I imagine you could include your, um, if you’re in your car, your insurance and registration as that handy place to put that, and then you can just hand them all together.
Um, so I just wanted to make people aware of that because I think it’s a wonderful program that can be very beneficial. Um, and then also just today, Council member Twiss and I, I got to tour, uh, our new, um, housing units at Cottonwood Grove with Kristen Heiser. Um, and, uh, this community is specifically designed for people with developmental disabilities.
And I was just so impressed with the thoughtfulness of the design because they had, uh, safety, inclusivity and accessibility built into everything. They also have two people on staff, a property manager that personally handles the the tours and leasing and maintenance, but also a resident assistant that helps facilitate programming and like social events.
Um, and we even met with a prospective resident that went to school at Ballston, which is right next door, and she is so excited to live there that she comes and visits regularly just because, like the prospect of having this be her new home is so wonderful.
And so we are excited for all the people that call Cottonwood Grove their new home. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mayor Pro Tem Lim, uh, yes. Last Tuesday, since, as Council Member Peterson said, we didn’t have a council meeting.
I went to the closing ceremony of the 25th anniversary celebration and presentation of the sister city partnership of the city with away to city Japan. So there is an ongoing project, which I think is exciting. It’s called the Global Impact Project, and it’s meant to showcase local sustainability efforts. So it’s an exchange of information between the sustainability department at from Weta Japan and our Broomfield Sustainability department.
So there were a lot of site visits last week, by the way, to, um, sustainability director and then our Broomfield Sustainability. Sustainability employee will also have a chance to visit there in the fall, all sponsored by the sister city Partnership. So we are looking forward to seeing how we can learn from each other in this effort. Thanks.
Thank you. Council member ward. Thank you. Mayor. Um, so at the. As a reminder for everyone on council, I am the Broomfield representative for the Northwest Parkway Public Highway Authority, and I serve as chair of the authority.
The authority at the most recent board meeting directed authority staff to collaborate with the Northwest Parkway concessionaire and RTD to determine the feasibility of establishing a kind of park and ride stop for airport services. So I just wanted to let everyone know. Thank you for that. Anyone else? All right then, uh, we’ll now continue with general public comment.
This is an opportunity for the public to comment on matters other than those listed elsewhere on the agenda. So if you would like to be heard on something, please make your way to the podium. State your name and neighborhood for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. Please. Good evening, Mayor and City Council members.
My name is Marwan Shaer and I live in Ward one. I’m here to voice my concerns with the use of surveillance technologies in Broomfield, specifically, automated license plate readers, reader cameras or Alper, such as those made by the company. Flag safety.
I want to start by saying that I support the Broomfield PD and law enforcement, and I support using technology to solve serious crimes, but there is a very important distinction between using excuse me, between using surveillance to investigate a serious crime and creating a system that records the movement of every everyone who drives through our city.
A few weeks ago, I noticed a Flock Alper camera that went up at the southwest corner of Midway Boulevard and Highway 27. I came to know that the camera is operated by the Broomfield Police Department. Like several others along roads and routes that I and many others frequent, and I became very concerned.
LPR cameras don’t just identify a vehicle after a crime has occurred, they continuously capture license plates, vehicle characteristics, the time and the location of the vehicle passing the cameras. The footage is retained on the manufacturer’s database for future use. So imagine this you drive to work. You take your children to school, you visit a friend, shop for groceries, or attend a religious service.
And each time you pass one of these cameras, your vehicle vehicle’s location can become part of a searchable law enforcement database and may have done absolutely nothing wrong. That concerns me, and it should be concerned for every law abiding, law abiding citizen. And there is another issue that I think deserves much more attention.
Who gets access to that information? Lock itself says that the local agency controls data sharing and can share camera access with with other police departments. 1 to 1 by geographic radius. Statewide or even nationwide. So with every one of these cameras, we’re not just talking about the database that only our local police department can use.
We’re potentially connecting our community to a much larger surveillance network, and more questions need to be asked. Who exactly will be allowed to search it and why, under what circumstances? What legal standard will be required, and what prevents someone from abusing that access? These are not hypothetical concerns.
There have been already recent reports of law enforcement officers improperly using FLoC and other LPR systems, including unauthorized searches. A recent nationwide story happened here in Colorado, where a policeman showed up at someone’s house wrongfully accusing her. Sir, your time has expired. Do you get three minutes to wrap up your final comment? Yes. Sorry. Go to your end.
I respectfully ask the City Council and the Broomfield Police Department to seriously consider the existing policies and use of these cameras, and to at least gather feedback from our residents about having them in our city. Thank you. Perfect. Thank you very much. Mayor. Mayor. Pro tem. City council staff. Jesse Applegate, country estates.
Uh, I’d like to second what the previous public commenter spoke about, as well as, uh, share and share his concerns with, uh, who exactly is in charge of these things? There’s been many cases, not just 1 or 2 of complete overreach by random law enforcement officers.
Uh, using this system and systems that are connected to it, uh, to track down X’s or marital partners who have left very concerning stuff, I would greatly, uh, urge you to reconsider contracts with company, flock and all other Alper systems. Thank you. Thank you very much. Clarification I. Want to talk about the last item on the agenda. Can I talk about now or do I wait for. Then you have to wait. Perfect. Okay.
Thank you. Anyone else on general public comments before we move on? Okay I don’t. Are you gonna are you going to speak or are you just leaving? You’re speaking. Okay, good. Just a quick, quick, quick. Sure. Thanks. I’m in Ward one.
I’m Mercy Manresa, and I just wanted to thank you again for all the support that you give the community as a whole. And I appreciate that you are continuing to have housing and transportation at the top of your list of what you are focusing on and for the community and anyone in the room who hasn’t read it.
I would highly recommend When We Walk By, which is about forgotten humanity, broken systems, and the role we can each play in ending homelessness in America. And please take the time this week, everybody, to just say hello to a neighbor housed or unhoused that you don’t know, and just introduce yourself and be grateful that we’re all here
together. And thank you, everybody, for what you do. Have a good night. Thank you. All right. Anyone else? All right. Moving on then. The next item on the agenda is the Master Services Agreement quarterly report, which was provided on this evening’s agenda under reports. Uh, nothing there. Right. It’s okay. It’s like. Yeah, we supplied that report.
There’s no question on it. I don’t know why that’s through me. It’s just so random. Okay, moving on to the other reports. We’ll now continue with the reports section of the agenda. Uh, City Manager Hoffman, do you have a report? I do not, thank you. Thank you. Attorney Rogers, do you have a report? No. Thank you.
Mayor. Okay, thanks. Council’s consideration of the consent items is next. The clerk will now read the consent items by title. And there will be one opportunity for public comments and council questions and comments. Will the clerk please read agenda item six a through 60 by title. Six a.
Approval of minutes for the Council meeting of July 28th, 2026 six. Be proposed resolution number 2020 639 approving a construction agreement with Rochdale Construction Inc. for the Markle wattage Trail Improvements project six C Proposed Resolution number 2026 eight for approving the Third Amendment to the agreement with the Mile High Flood District for design and construction of drainage and flood control improvements for the city Park
channel at Main Street. Six D Proposed Resolution number 2020 698, adopting a policy regarding electric vehicle charging station fees. Thank you. We’ll now proceed with public comments.
If any residents are using the call in service, they should indicate their desire to speak by pressing star nine to raise their hand. We’ll start with in person. If anyone would like to comment on the consent agenda items, now’s the time. Seeing none, we’ll go to Council. Oh, sorry. You need to sit closer. You got a long way to go. That’s good. Point.
Um, as I was reading these, uh, what, a week ago or whenever you guys alone to come out, um, the Markle open space and the Walcott open space. Um, I know a lot of people, even at some of the other meetings that we’ve had here locally.
Um, for Broomfield, being together and doing things together have brought this subject up, because when I went to all the meetings for these to be, um, finished and changed over and put into open space, um, they said that they already because everybody was asking where the money was coming from to finish these off, or if we had to wait, or whether that was going to come from the open space, tax money or whatever.
And we were told that it was already, um, been assigned to it and had been approved. Um, but that wasn’t exactly true. And so later on, when they did bring it to city council, you did approve the monies.
And then at the last meetings, when I was at the BCC, um, a lot of people came up and was asking me about it, and I said, you need to ask your representatives and the city on what’s going on.
So I’m glad to see that finally something is happening because people have been wanting to use our new open space. And I know it’s it’s not really usable right now. Um, so it’s hard to get to and everything else. So we still need a time frame on how things are going.
If somebody can um, in some of the reports can report on how things are going, like, um, if they’re ever going to start construction or if it’s just on the information phrases or engineering, or they’re having a water problem, or because I didn’t even think that they were going to water anything because that’s what we were told. So now all of a sudden, I see in there that has to do with water too.
So that’s that’s kind of deceiving. Um, so just keep us informed on what’s going on there. Um, whether it’s going to take another five years or what. So thank you. Thank you very much. Any other comments from the public? All right. We’ll go to council next.
Does any member of council have any comments or questions on these agenda items? Mayor Pro Tem Lynn. Yes. Um, could open space. comment on the timetable for the construction proceeding on the Markle and Waukee open space to answer Miss Jules questions. Thank you. Good evening. Mayor. Mayor. Pro tem council. My name is Brian Graham. I’m the capital improvement program manager in community development.
It’s my team that’s managing the Waukee Open space. And excuse me, Waukee. Markel Open Space project. Uh, with your approval this evening, uh, that project is anticipated to start in September, and we expect the project to be completed by the end of next summer. Is that answer your question? I think it does. I think that addresses her question.
Um, well, just go back to a little background. Uh, I’m not sure if you have that CIP has that background or open space has that background as to why there was somewhat of a delay. I mean, I know I started I started following the project in November of 2022. It’s in Ward three.
Um, and then, um, there were what I would say is there was a great effort done to get, um, engagement from stakeholders, from the residents and that so that all takes time.
But is there anything else that open space would like to comment on with the timetable leading up to this point? Uh, I can’t speak to the development of the of the Joaquim Michael open space plan, although, uh, Kristin may be able to speak to that, uh, as it relates to our general process for planning and design and construction.
Often these types of projects go through a master planning process, which you referred to. And once the project scope is identified, that will come to my team to engineer or hire an engineer to design those improvements that are conceptualized as part of a master plan.
Uh, in this case, we’ve been working on that design for some time, and certainly faced some delays, in part due to some adjacent property issues. Uh, adding to the scope of the project, such as adding a fishing dock to the the pond at Markel and getting through, you know, just several of the design elements took longer than anticipated. Okay. Thank you.
Um, I did have another question from an email from a resident. Um, we’ll both open spaces be started simultaneously, or will one area precede the other in construction? So, um, if the. Contracts are, if the contract is approved tonight, Kristin Prince, director of Open Space and Trails.
Then we have a meeting set up tentatively with the contractor to go over his approach and scheduling to the project. So we’ll see what that is. Um, and, and try to coordinate that as best as possible. Okay. Thank you. Those were my questions. And thank you to everyone who has worked on this project.
Um, and, um, thank you to all the residents too, who have have been patient and have engaged in this process. We had a lot of residents who went to open houses and, and open Space Committee. Um, to make sure that in their input was heard. So thank you. Thank you. Council Member Anderson. Um. Thank you. I have a. Question related to the EV charging resolution.
I want to start by saying I appreciate the alignment with the peak demand period. Um, that just made a whole lot more sense. And I’m glad that it’s structured that way. And I also recognize the, um, the need to help get cars moving along when they are done charging. Charging.
I just, um, I just want to quick get an update from staff on what is the plan for communicating the start of the new rate structure? Um, kind of help people understand why we’re implementing it, and especially the increase that begins 30 minutes after the car is no longer charging. I think that’s at $0.40 a minute. That’s $24 an hour.
And I can see some pretty shocked residents when they like. They should have been moving the car all along, like I agree with that. But that’s going to be like that moment when you if you wait a couple hours or more, that’s going to be pretty hefty. So probably only do it once though.
Oh, they would only do it once, but just what is that? I want to make sure we have an upfront communication plan that that’s going to be posted there. And maybe in the community that we send out. Thank you. We appreciate. That question. Yeah, we call that the transitional phase.
Mr. Gordon, do you want to talk about that transitional phase? Absolutely. Barney Gordon, public works director. Uh, we have already met with communications. We’ve developed a very robust communications, uh, outreach program. Uh, that’s one of the reasons why it’s going to be, you know, 3 or 4 months between the time the resolution is passed and the implementation.
Uh, so starting tonight, actually, uh, and the report out, assuming that the resolution passes, uh, that will start that communication plans, which will include signage at the, uh, at each charger, very clear signage at each charger. Uh, various website updates, social media campaigns and things like that.
So we are, uh, prepared and ready to go with the communication plan with our partners in communications. Yep. And you. Just reminded me I was. Supposed to let you guys know we were experiencing some intermittent, uh, power outages earlier in the afternoon, which hasn’t happened. But if it does, don’t panic. We have generators that will power on within a few seconds.
So we’ll still be able to conduct our business. So pardon me for that. Council member Brown. Just a PSA. Thank you. Mayor. Um. so I. Wanted to circle back to Miss Jules comments. Um, and I will just say that I was not following along with the early planning meetings back in 2022.
So I’m hoping someone can please address the question about water. Um, I was just looking quickly through the budget and I see some references to irrigation, which I’m assuming is specific to just supporting the new landscaping that’s being installed.
But from a from an ongoing perspective, I’m just curious if you can speak to whether there’s anything intentionally being maintained within that area that’s going to require water every year for the rest of time? Thanks. Thank you again. This is Kristen Prince, director of Open Space and Trails. So the plan has always included some entry, landscaping that is low water use.
And we have found that just planting trees in the open space, unless they are right on the edge of a drainage, it’s very difficult to keep them alive. So there will be limited, uh, drip irrigation, um, to those plantings.
Um, and it is a modest amount of actual landscaping, primarily at the entries on the property. There is a drainage that goes through the southern third of the property, and we are enhancing that with, with habitat type landscaping. And again, there will be some irrigation for that. So the water is very minimal.
But really to have some of that, um, habitat enhancement, we really need to do that. And that was one of the things that came up in the public process also as being something that was valued. Great. Thank you for addressing that. Sure. All right. Thank you. Any other questions or comments on the consent items? Seeing none.
Uh, is there a motion by council that consent item six A through six D be approved? Council member Henkel. So moved. Thank you. Is there a second council member? Ward second. Thank you. Is there any discussion? Seeing none. Uh, Council, please cast your vote electronically. And Council member McKenzie, please state your vote verbally. Thank you.
That was a yes. All council members have entered their vote, and the results will be displayed on the screen. That passes unanimously, 10 to 0. All right. The first item under action items tonight is the public hearing and council’s consideration on second reading of an ordinance related to expired vehicle registrations.
I’ll now declare the public hearing open. Council has a copy of the agenda memorandum, which I’ll ask our staff to summarize. Thank you. Mayor. Making their way down to the podium is commander. Which latch? The floor is yours, sir. Thank you. Uh. Good evening, mayor. Mayor, Pro tem, Council members.
Commander Kent, which is with Broomfield Police Department, oversee the traffic unit. Um, so next slide is a very brief presentation. So, um, tonight, what we’re here for is amending some language from an ordinance that was passed in April. Um, so we’re clarifying some of the language. Um, reference unregistered vehicles. Um, cleaning it up just a little bit to make more sense.
Um, and this was a request, um, from the courts and the city attorney’s office, just to make it more understandable and relatable. So people knew exactly what was going on. Next slide. These are the specific changes. One of the big ones was um, initially we had no person shall operate.
Um, what we wanted to include was the registered owner as well. Um, because sometimes it’s not one in the same. And so we added that piece in there. Um, in case we come across any vehicles that were, um, parked unattended, we could still go down that route.
Um, code enforcement has a small piece of that, um, as opposed to just doing a vehicle as a junk vehicle. Um, they could actually do it this way if it’s parked on the public right of way. Um, the next one is a presumption that they built in.
So presuming that if somebody, um, is driving a vehicle and is not the registered owner, it’s presumed that the owner has given them permission to use that vehicle or operate that vehicle. Um, and that is mimicking what the state law is as well. In title 42. Um, and then the final piece that we added was the notice.
Um, so as opposed to just leaving a notice on the vehicle. Uh, we would also mail a notice to the registered owner. Um, if it was unattended. So if we didn’t actually talk to somebody and we left it like a parking ticket, we would do a notice as well in the mail to ensure that that owner was notified, which is very similar to the process
that we do for towed vehicles right now. Is, is we mailed registered mail to them as well? Next slide. So in summary, like I said, we, um, are updating the language to try and make it a little bit more understandable for people to see exactly what is happening and what we’re
looking for. Um, and it also explains how we will mail notice if the vehicle is unattended. So very quick and short. Now I’m ready for questions. Love the brevity. Okay, well, first we’re going to go to the public and see if they have any comments.
So would any member of the public like to comment on this item? Then we’ll go to council. Any questions from my colleague, Council member Henkel? Mayor, thank you for the short presentation tonight. Um, I. People look up municipal for clarity. Two reasons.
So the reason we really approach this for the ordinance that was passed back in April was for our code enforcement officers, and then our new traffic investigator. They are both non sworn positions, so they’re not police officers. So they don’t have the ability to enforce state law. And so that allows them to actually take enforcement.
So right now if we have a vehicle crash and our civilian traffic investigator goes out there, um, and then there’s a registration violation, we have to pull a police officer to come over, um, and then cite all of that either into two separate courts or all into one court. So that was the big push for doing that. And then, yes, just being in line with what state statute reads as well.
Okay. Interesting. I know that makes that it. Is it. Anyone else? All right then. Thank you. Um, there being no further questions, the public hearing is closed. Next is council’s consideration of proposed ordinance number 2300. Will the clerk please read the proposed ordinance by title? Seven eight, Ordinance number 2300.
Updating the requirement for up to date vehicle registration as a condition of driving a vehicle in Broomfield to allow for accountability and either the driver or the registered owner. Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the ordinance on second and final reading and order published by title? Council member Ward. So moved.
Thank you. Is there a second Council member? Delgadillo. Second. Thank you. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, we’ll move forward to the vote on ordinance number 2300. Council, please cast your vote electronically. Council member McKenzie, please state your vote verbally. Yes. Thank you.
All council members have entered their vote, and the results will be displayed on the screen. That passes unanimously, 10 to 0. Thank you. Gentlemen. And Courtney. Thank you, Miss Demon. Sorry. Our next item under Action Items this evening is Council’s consideration of a resolution related to a potential ballot question regarding the 17th Judicial District.
Da term limits. Council has a copy of the agenda memorandum, which I’ll ask our staff to summarize. Thank you. Making his way down to the podium is Da Brian Mason. This is his item and docket and request. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Madam Mayor, Pro Tem, distinguished members of city council, distinguished county manager, deputy county manager and county attorney. Uh, my name is Brian Mason. I am the district attorney for Colorado’s 17th Judicial District, which includes Broomfield and Adams counties. And I’m here tonight to ask the council to refer to the ballot, a proposed ballot measure to set the term limits for the district attorney for this district at three terms.
Before I say anything else on that, I wanted to start with a moment of levity by saying I was so proud of my fashion choice tonight of wearing a yellow tie, uh, with the sea of yellow shirts. And I also would like to acknowledge all of the nonprofit leaders for the wonderful work that you do.
Okay, back to the topic at hand. Uh, Colorado is unique in the United States when with regards to district attorneys, in that it is the only state in the Union that limits or term limits its district attorneys. It’s the only state in the Union that does that.
The question you might ask is why? Well, the district attorney is a highly specialized role. The district attorney for this jurisdiction, which I am currently in this position on a daily basis, makes decisions about homicide cases, sexual assault cases, drug distribution cases, every every major criminal case with within the criminal code.
I personally have worked for this district Attorney’s office for almost 20 years. It’ll be 20 years in December, and I’m serving now in my sixth year as the elected district attorney. Again, it’s a highly specialized role I supervise, and the Da supervises a staff of 257 employees. That’s everywhere.
Everyone from attorneys to paralegals to victim advocates to members of our diversion unit, etc. in this community, in the metro area and beyond, the 17th Judicial District, Da is on a little bit of an island when it comes to term limits.
First of all, within Adams and Broomfield counties, all elected officials in Adams County and most elected officials in Broomfield County can serve up to three terms. The term limits are set at three terms. That’s true for, as you all know, the Broomfield City councilors in Adams County. That’s true for all elected officials countywide, including the Board of County commissioners, the sheriff, clerk and recorder.
The only exception to that is the coroner. The voters chose to eliminate term limits for the coroner altogether. In our surrounding judicial districts, there are 23 judicial districts in the state of Colorado. Our surrounding judicial districts. Around the 17th, the majority of them give their DA’s up to three terms to serve.
So the City and County of Denver, which is the Second Judicial District, the D.A. can serve up to three terms, are the 20th Judicial District, which is Boulder County. The Da may serve up to three terms. Weld County. I will note conservative Weld County allows their DA’s to serve up to three terms.
The Da term limit issue in Colorado has not been a partisan one. There are many other judicial districts across the state that also set their term limits for the Da at three terms, including conservative Colorado Springs, which is the fourth Judicial district. Conservative Mesa County, the home of Tina Peters, the Da.
And in that judicial district can serve up to three terms. So we’re on a little bit of an island here. This is not the first time that this has been referred to the voters. We have tried this before, and we have learned lessons from our earlier attempts, particularly our last attempt.
I have this is the second time that I have tried this in my time as the Da, and one of the lessons that we learned is that voters did not understand the why behind the ask, namely, voters didn’t understand or didn’t realize. Some voters didn’t realize the DA’s were term limited at all.
Some voters, many voters, did not understand that the Da in this jurisdiction was the only office amongst most other offices to be term limited at two, and we’ve done some polling on this, and we’ve done research on it.
I’ve worked with election lawyers and consultants and others, and that was one of the lessons that we learned. And so the language that I have submitted tonight for your consideration is a result of that research, a result of the polling, a result of our lessons learned from attempts in the past.
And it is based on the language that the Broomfield City Council used two years ago, when this council put before or that council put before the voters a term limit ballot initiative regarding the Broomfield City Council.
The only difference really, other than, um, the only difference between those two questions is that the wording of this initiative specifically states that this is consistent with other countywide elected officials in both Adams County and the City and County of Broomfield, because, as I stated, that was one of the things that we learned from the last attempt and something that voters who participated in the polling really cared about.
They really cared about equity and consistency in the term limits for all of their elected officials. I’ll conclude by saying, from a public policy and a public safety perspective, having the opportunity for a d.A. To serve up to three terms is good for stability at the DA’s office, and it’s therefore good for stability in the community.
Again, I have worked at this DA’s office now for 20 years, and before I held the position, I now currently hold, I had to learn how to try a case. I had to learn how to supervise other people. I had to learn how to file a homicide case. These are skills that you learn, um, over time.
And then when you are privileged to be elected by the voters, to be put into this position, all of my colleagues across the state, including me, have recruited people to come work for us at the DA’s office to build the team that can best serve our community.
There are members of my senior staff at the DA’s office now who I have recruited and who are there to work for me, and it would be a shame to lose that institutional knowledge and that experience every eight years when you could have greater stability for the office, which would improve recruitment and retention and stability for the community.
So I respectfully ask this council to refer the proposed ballot initiative to the November ballot, and I’m happy to take questions. Thank you. Thank you very much. Da mason. Well, now proceed with public comments. If anyone would like to speak on this item. Now is the time. All right then we’ll move on to Councilmember questions.
And next, do any of my colleagues have any questions? Not seeing any. All right then next is council’s consideration of proposed resolution number 2020 685. Will the clerk please read the proposed resolution by title.
Seven be resolution number 2020 685? Directing the City and County Clerk to place a question on the November 2026 ballot relating to the modification of term limits for the District Attorney in the 17th Judicial District. Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the resolution? Council Member Henkel. So moved. Thank you. Is there a second Council member? Ward second. Thank you. Um, is there any discussion? Councilmember Twiss. Thank you.
Uh, first, I would like to thank District Attorney Mason for taking the time to talk through this question with me over the last couple of days. And for your continued service to our community. I intend to support this measure, and we’ll vote for it tonight.
And I will personally vote yes if it is on my ballot in November. That said, I do want to flag how the ballot question is framed as written. It asks voters whether the DA’s term should be, quote, limited to three terms language that reads as imposing a new restriction when it is the opposite, extending the maximum time in office from 8 to 12 years.
I understand that this language is the same that was used by council in 2024 to move from 2 to 3 terms. Some voters said that they, at the time that they believed they were voting to impose limits, not extend them. I did not like the wording.
Then, prior to my time on council, and I don’t like it now, to be clear, I support extending Da term limits to match the standard used across most surrounding counties. I recognize Colorado is the only state that imposes term limits on district attorneys at all.
I have no issues whatsoever with the substance of the ballot measure, but I don’t care for the language in how it’s being presented to voters. I would ask that when the Bluebook language is developed, it explicitly and plainly state that this measure expands the number of terms a Da may serve, rather than relying on the limit language that could be misinterpreted. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Delgadillo.
Thank you, mayor, and thank you. Uh, for being here as well. Uh, I’ll go ahead and say that I think there’s been some vibrant discussion, uh, one on one with folks about the language of the ballot ballot initiative.
Um, I would take a somewhat different stance here and say that I think it is helpful to explain that if we were to start again, if we were to figure out what we were going to do forward, independent on of what has been done before, what is a reasonable term limit. And I do think that you can search for how many term limits are currently imposed.
I think this information is very clearly out here. And so stating this is, I think, a very reasonable way to frame the ballot question, though. Again, I understand the vibrant back and forth, so I would encourage us to kind of reflect on that perspective as well before we take our votes. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Peterson.
Thank you, mayor. and thank you, attorney Mason. Uh, I to do not prefer the language, but I recognize that the past language has been misinterpreted, so it makes sense to try again.
I also agree that it would be appropriate and beneficial for the days term to match that of other electeds. Uh, I also understand that the that Adams County has already approved this language and that it needs to match on both our ballot and theirs. Um, so I am willing to refer this ballot question to the voters.
And I also encourage the Da to include language in the Blue Book that clarifies the why as well as the current term, um, along with the benefits to the voters for having three terms. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Anyone else? All right then, Council, please cast your vote electronically. Council member McKenzie, please state your vote verbally. Yes. Thank you.
All Council members have entered their vote, and the results will be displayed on the screen. That passes unanimously, 10 to 0. Thank you very much. Da mason. Thank you. Our next item under Action Items this evening is Council’s consideration of two potential resolutions related to the proposed Broomfield Rail stations and the development of joint surface, rail and passenger rail along the Front
Range Council has a copy of the agenda memorandum, which I’ll ask our staff to summarize. Thank you very much. And Sarah Grant, our deputy Director of Community development. And I see that Brandon just walked in. We were hoping that there wasn’t an issue on 36 for you flying up here.
Um, miss Grant, please introduce us to this item and walk us through. Thank you. Thank you, Manager Hoffman. And good evening, mayor, mayor Pro tem and council. I’m Sarah Grant, deputy director of community development, here to present the resolutions regarding Broomfield Rail Station location. Decision. The public can view the memo and related documentation on the Public agenda portal.
Next slide please join service for rail and front passenger rail, now collectively branded the Colorado Connector, are two parallel rail projects. Joint service is the agency funded starter service offering three daily round trips per day between Denver and Fort Collins starting in 2029.
Front range Passenger Rail is a proposed voter funded expansion, extending service south to Pueblo, and proposes increasing corridor frequency to 1010 round trips per day, pending a voter initiative and passing. Tonight’s purpose is to confirm a preferred station location, allowing joint service to finalize its BNSF agreement and begin station design.
This decision also provides Front Range passenger rail with a station narrative for public documents, and ensures Bloomfield’s eligibility for local return funding. Both joint service and Front Range Passenger Rail recommend 1/16 Avenue and have provided updated joint Service and Joint Service Investment memo on July 29th outlining new fiscal commitments for 1/16 Avenue and risks associated with flat iron.
The memo is shared with Council and is linked in tonight’s staff memo. Adopting either resolution is a planning step only, and it does not obligate Broomfield to fund or construct anything. Tonight, Council will adopt either resolution 2020 686 for 1/16 Avenue or 2026 101 for Flatiron. Next slide. The timing matters for this evening’s decision.
Because of an upcoming deadline, regardless of site selection, Broomfield qualifies for Front Range passenger rail space. Local return of 2.5 million per year for 25 years, totaling 62.5 million, contingent on a future ballot measure. The station can be chosen at any time to qualify for this optional program.
However, the revised memo clarified that 10% bonus raising that amount to 2.75 million annually, or 68.7 5,000,000/25 years, is available only if council selects 1/16 Avenue by this Friday, August 14th. Flat iron does not qualify for that bonus. Alongside this deadline. Joint service. Updated July 29th. Memo also confirmed two key updates.
First, joint service now assumes all financial risk for the starter service, including platform property acquisition and parking development, with no funding required from Broomfield. Second Joint Service expanded its sidewalk commitment to construct a continuous sidewalk connection between the US 36 and Broomfield Station pedestrian bridge to the platform along 1/16 Avenue.
Next slide the revised July 29th memo from Joint Service and Front Range Passenger Rail provides the clearest financial commitments to date. Joint service assumes all capital risk for the starter service platform amenities, property acquisition and parking without any prior qualifying language.
If a funding shortfall arises, partners will first seek state, regional or federal funds and Broomfield incurs no obligation without a separate council vote. The Colorado Transportation Investment Office, also known as CTO, is expected to own, operate and maintain the station platform and parking, and this will be formalized as design progresses. Any proposed parking parcels will undergo Broomfield Standard’s land development review process, including public comment. Next slide.
And now to compare the two sites directly based on the revised July 29th memo for Joint Service and Front Range Passenger Rail, 1/16 Avenue aligns with the corridor policies and has fully funded core infrastructure and qualifies for the local return bonus. Broomfield would be responsible for additional sidewalks in the area and, if desired, an underpass.
Some improvements can be infused over time, and local return funds could help if approved. If an underpass is desired. The timing in the underpass investments may depend on the BNSF requirements and are subject to future conversations and negotiations.
Flatiron offers a lower near-term construction risk due to the existing and RTD BNSF property locations, but requires a new BNSF review. Policy changes, faces track and crossing challenges, and there is no cost estimate or funding commitment from joint service for Flatiron. Next slide. Staff has prepared two station selection resolutions with identical protections. Both are non-binding and do not commit Broomfield to funding or future obligations, and treat the station site as a planning assumption only.
Each preserves Broomfield $2.5 million base return, and the city is not liable for any cost overruns. Any future agreements require separate council approval, and the resolution state that nothing in the resolutions bind the City and County of Broomfield to any action or funding to support in the future.
As such, action would be needing approval by council following public meetings. Next slide. With equal protections, the differences in each site’s benefits and risks for 1/16 Avenue Joint service funds the platform amenities, parking, and the 1/16 Avenue sidewalk connection. Qualifying Broomfield for the 10% bonus. The primary local risk is an unfunded sidewalk. Gaps and potential underpass. As discussed.
Flatiron is not recommended by either agency and lacks the cost estimate for its 6.25 million in bonus funding and faces risks related to station spacing, track curvature, crossings, environmental review, implementation delays, and policy changes. Next slide.
The resolutions adopt a nonbinding station narrative as requested by Front Range Passenger Rail for use in public facing documents briefly on what each narrative tells voters is that 1/16 Avenue realizes the original Broomfield neighborhood plans vision for a transit oriented hub with connections to a BRT station, the Flatiron Flyer, plus nearby businesses and residents in Arista and Interlaken.
Flatiron leverages existing RTD parking and offers RTD direct intermodal connections to the RTD airport service and the BRT Flatiron Flyer, and also serves residents and businesses in Broomfield and the flyer, marketplace, flyer and Crossing Interlocking, Lewisville and superior areas. Next slide. In summary, adopting either resolution commits Broomfield to no financial obligations.
The language is protective until Council revisits the issue, and staff recommends council weigh the corridor level case for 1/16 Avenue. Now, with firmer written funding commitments, commitments against flat irons, lower near-term construction costs to support the station area, but greater long term and corridor uncertainty. Whichever state, whichever site is location, whichever site is chosen. Both resolutions include language ensuring future costs or agreement. Binds Broomfield without several vote.
The motion tonight is proposed is either adoption of resolution 2020 686 for 1/16 Avenue, or resolution 2026 101 for Flatiron. I’ll now turn the presentation over to Brandon Schaefer with the state of Colorado. Thank you very much, miss Grant. Thank. Good evening. Council. Thank you for having me back. Brandon Schaefer, a special advisor for passenger rail and transit.
Um, it’s been a summer here in Broomfield. I look forward to a frequent public comment badge from you. All the good to be here this evening. Um, tonight is the culmination of almost a year and a half.
Was work on joint service really bringing rail to the northwest corridor here through Broomfield, and almost a week from tomorrow is the one year anniversary of us starting the negotiation with BNSF to really bring rail to our community here in Broomfield, which is really exciting. Um, tonight we are just building on Sarah’s memo and Sarah’s presentation as well to advance the 116th Avenue resolution. So next slide please.
Um, our project recommendation is to advance resolution 2020 686, where 116th Avenue, as this aligns with Front Range Rail and Joint Services recommendation. Tonight also is just a confirmation of a milepost and the dot on the map for Broomfield of where the station would be.
Um, and so we are this would allow us to proceed into engineering. Importantly would allow us to begin property coordination and also station development to advance and also just preserves Broomfield eligibility for the 10% bonus on top of the our local return.
Shall the board advance a ballot measure and successful this November or in future years? The alternative location, which is resolution 2026, is 101. Um, advancing flatirons does not align with our recommendation for the project and would require new railroad, technical, environmental policy and cost analysis. And we also just don’t have a cost estimate for what that would even look like for flatirons. Next slide please.
This is our 116th Avenue is our project recommendation based on these four buckets here of rail feasibility of just having the necessary tangent track or straight track 4000ft. Almost a mile’s worth there to build on. Not only joint service right now, but also in the future when FRP builds out even more infrastructure and increases the frequency, the project readiness here as well.
We are excited because this already has been in our planning and our budget. It’s been the assumed and planned location for the access agreement location, and we are ready to enter into engineering and property coordination with an A and E firm in architecture and engineering firm and also begin property coordination in that area as well.
Um, the other consideration here is just a corridor operations as well. So it does adhere is about 6.1 miles to Louisville, which is a little bit more than the five mile distance from Front Range passenger rail station distance policy.
Um, and then also just the community investment of that 10% return back to Broomfield, which I think is a really big bonus. And also the city and county would control those funds if a ballot measure passed. Next slide please. Um, again, this is just all of the amenities that would be paid for and is assumed in our budget for joint service.
This is the required track work, the lighting, the electrical, the safety components here. And then also for parking, pedestrian connection, that, uh, sidewalk connectivity from the pedestrian bridge all the way to the platform. Um, and then also we have a budget for property acquisition as well. And then also the addition of canopies and windscreens.
What’s really important here that we wanted to ensure is that no local match is requested of Broomfield for any of these amenities or any of our budget at all. This is the project is assuming all of these costs and all we ask of Broomfield tonight is to advance the resolution for 116th Avenue. Next slide please. Is that a couch and where the amenities were? Uh.
Go back a slide, please. It looks like a little sofa. A little seat. Yeah. We’ll call the bench. Yeah. We comfy bench. You want? So comfy bench. Okay. Thanks. Next slide please.
Um, we just put this side by side so that this was a little bit more easy to digest and understand from council and public perspective, but really 116th Avenue not only is a recommendation, but it’s already included in our project planning and already has a preliminary budget established that we shared in the July and I think June meeting here as well. Um, Flatirons is not recommended. We don’t have a project budget for that.
No validated estimates. This would require new technical review with BN to do this. And we have very limited track there on that curve right next to Flatiron as well. And less, um, straight tangent track to actually build frequency later on.
Um, and then again, the curvature, the crossing there at Brainerd Drive and the open space right above there with Boulder also presents some really difficult and environmental processes. And, uh, considerations that we need to take into account later on. And then the base allocation as well is not allotted for flatirons, because that is the station narrative is tied to 116. Next slide please.
Again this is just our budget here as well for what’s accounted for within the right of way. Um, we haven’t shared the cost of outside, um, for the parking and property acquisition, just that we don’t have landmarks.
And those seen what we’re willing to spend so we can protect that number and actually get to where we need to go on this. And we also have learned of other property development right there at 116th Avenue, with a couple different parcels there where parking may be an option to collaborate with other projects in that area as well. Um, so about 5.6 million here is allotted.
And then the 30% contingency, which at this stage of the project is a standard allocation to a have for the project at 1.04 million. So we can really draw on that to also build upon if costs increase or if other amenities are also added at this specific location. Next slide.
What we are not asking council tonight to approve is the final station or parking design at all. We are not asking for local construction dollars from your limited budget. We are not asking for a position on a future ballot measure, nor are we asking you all for authorization to acquire the property.
Or are we asking you all to own, operate or maintain the platform, the station, or the parking lot associated with this? So this is not what we’re asking of you. We just want to put a dot on the map for Broomfield so we can advance negotiations. Next slide.
Um, this is just to build on Sara’s presentation as well. This is the 2.5 base annual allocation allotted to the City and County of Broomfield for 25 years to build out more than just the amenities that the project is going to pay for.
So this is first and last mile connection, which was something that public residents here at the last council meeting were asking for about how do we actually make sure that people can get to and from the platform. You can also add different amenities here.
Um, contingent on future voter approval, and then also working with the Front Range Passenger Rail District to build out an IGA in 2027 to secure the money and secure that agreement with the district. Um, the additional 6.25 million is only associated with the 116th Avenue station location, and that narrative as well. Next slide.
This kind of just lays out what council will advance tonight or if you advance flatirons. So tonight on the left hand side if you advance 116th, not only will we confirm the station location and the mile marker, but we also can advance the BNSF access agreement.
Um, while we have gotten the term sheet signed and agreed upon earlier this year, we have been writing the underlying agreement and we just want to finalize a few exhibits to put the station here in Broomfield and begin the engineering and property coordination, refine our parking approach, Ada access and pedestrian connections, and then just preserve that 10% local return.
I think this is important to point out as well, that if council tonight advances flatirons, it does pause the Broomfield station approach for a little bit because we would have to initiate new technical reviews and a fatal flaw with BNSF to actually evaluate one or the Flatirons location.
And then also assess platform crossing and environmental constraints that we currently have not done, and then revisit spacing and corridor operation assumptions, and then also develop a new cost estimate and funding plan. So it’s really would put Broomfield outside of the northwest alignment a little bit with the other communities, and that we would have to put Broomfield on a temporary hold as we look at Flatirons and get to a new cost estimate and understand the
feasibility. Next slide please. So this again, this is just our recommendation tonight as is to advance 2026 86 or 100 and 16th Avenue. And I thank you for allowing me to present it again tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Just to clarify, you prefer the 116 116. Kidding. Bold. Underline. Yeah. That’s what to say.
Thank you to Sarah as. well for her partnership. Thank you so much, Mr. Shafer. We’ll now proceed with public comments. If anyone would like to speak on this item. Here’s your opportunity. Please make your way to the podium. State your name and neighborhood for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. Please.
Hi Linda Fehrenbach from Willow Park. It’s been a long time since I’ve been up here. Um, I think this is a fairly obvious decision that you have before you tonight, and I understand there’s no financial obligation to Broomfield. If this were to pass.
Um, my question is about the bigger project and and how it relates to tax dollars that Broomfield citizens have paid over the years for fast tracks, which we’ve never received the benefit of.
And I heard reference to a 2027 ballot issue, and I’m sorry if I’m not educated on this, but is that for a state ballot issue or or are we going to be asked to pay more tax dollars? I guess, to culminate this service, which I highly support. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Fehrenbach. We’ll get an answer to your questions. Um, in fact, anyone else from the public want to speak? Go ahead. Mayor. Mayor Pro tem, uh, Council and staff Jesse Applegate, country estates.
Uh, I would support, uh, the 116th location. I do understand that. It’s not ideal, but it’s also free. So I’m sure we can work around it. And I personally really love to have a train, so thank you. Thank you very much.
Would anyone else like to be heard? Uh, we’ll go to council questions, and since I can, um, can I ask Mr. Schaffer to come back up and explain to our community about the ballot measure portion of this that wasn’t we didn’t address it because it’s not the item. But it’d be good to get that out there, if you don’t mind. Yeah. Thank you, mayor.
And I think it was Miss Farron Brook who asked the question. So the I think the beauty of joint service is that it actually does leverage and it really advances the beginner passenger rail through northwest Colorado all the way to Fort Collins.
And that it leverages the existing fast tracks sales and use tax at Broomfield, Westminster and other communities have been paying into for about 24 years now. I think, um, and we are using the monies there to bring passenger rail forward. And so we are not asking the public to fund three daily round trips and go to the ballot for that.
We also the state legislature passed two new ballot or two new funding streams to make passenger rail and transit a statewide priority. And this is one of the projects that are being leveraged to access those dollars now, in the future.
The front Passenger Rail District may refer a ballot measure in 2026, 2027, 2028, and that would actually just build upon the three daily round trips. So that would be a sales and use tax ballot measure. And that would actually allow the district to build upon this. So it’s been pointed out that three daily round trips is about six trains through those Broomfield community.
This would actually enable the district to build more infrastructure and increase the frequency all the way up to maybe ten round trips a day to the north. This also would enable the full district project from Fort Collins down to Pueblo.
The state legislature, when they created Senate Bill 24184, which was the congestion impact fee or rental car fee put into the legislative declaration that southern Colorado is no less important than northern Colorado. But they recognized that this community has been paying for a sales and use tax.
They haven’t seen a project for quite yet, and so they really wanted to make sure that the project was budgeting those dollars to the north first, as almost like a proof of concept that government can still do things, we can leverage the sales and use tax that you have been paying for. So something in the future, a future ballot measure, um, if it’s referred by the board, would just build upon this work. And then also it’s not a fast track plan.
For about four years now, the Colorado Department of Transportation, in coordination with both Union Pacific and BNSF, have been planning for a ten daily round trip to the north and six daily round trips to the south. And so we’ve actually been coordinating with the host railroads, which may not have happened 24 years ago, 21 years ago.
So we actually have a good working relationship with both host railroads here. Wonderful. Thank you so much, Mister Schaefer. Now go to my colleagues. Uh, does anyone have any questions for our presenters on this topic or. We have, we’ve discussed and asked and answered everything at this point. Frequent flyer. Um, okay.
Well, then, if there’s no questions, next is council’s consideration of the resolutions on this matter. Excuse me. Council is asked to determine which station narrative to endorse either the 1/16 station or the Flatiron station. Separate resolutions have been prepared for each option, and I ask each council member to cast their vote for your preferred station narrative. Pardon me.
Joint service in Front Range Passenger Rail recommends supporting the 1/16 Avenue location, therefore will consider proposed resolution number 2020 686. First, if it passes by a majority vote, the matter is concluded. If not, we’ll proceed to the Flat Iron Station resolution. Sorry about that. Okay, will the clerk please read the proposed resolution by title.
Seven, see resolution number 2020 686 supporting the Front Range Passenger Rail District’s narrative summary for a proposed Broomfield Rail station at 116th Avenue, and the development of joint surface, rail and passenger rail service along the Front Range. There, a motion to approve the resolution. Council member ward. So moved. Thank you. Is there a second Council member? Delgadillo second.
Thank you. Is there any discussion? Mayor Pro Tem Lynn. Yes. Um, we’ve had planning efforts underway since 2014 to provide bus rapid transit on Colorado seven, and it’s being advanced very slowly. Um, I believe these BRT plans on Colorado seven would provide a much greater positive impact on our Broomfield multi mobility goals.
Relief of traffic congestion and GHG goals. However, the state legislature has tied funding to Front Range passenger rail and could untie it if desired, but that is unlikely.
I feel some, uh, comfort in knowing that Front Range passenger rail has firmed up its funding commitment to limited infrastructure around the station, and has added the sidewalk. Um, extension. Um, I feel some confidence that staff has added protections into the resolutions to ensure that Broomfield is not making any commitment to any future funding for this station. Um, I do not believe I have not seen.
Anyway, um, extensive, um, data on the future cost of this rail station. Um, in fact, the, um, when asked a joint service has said that it has preliminary station budgets, but it still needs to refine estimates as engineering and BNSF coordination progresses. So all the details on design, for parking outside roads, costs and asset responsibility will be determined in later phases.
And I was I want to note for the public that, um, council’s support of either station does not indicate at this point in time that council supports any ballot measure that may come forward.
Um, so with those caveats and the can and the restrictions, which, um, Front Range passenger rail has imposed on only supporting the 116th station, then I will support 116th station. As a member Ward. Thank you. Mayor.
Um, I want to thank all of the work that Brandon Schaefer and Lisa Kaufman, Sal Pace and everyone else on the team for Front Range Passenger Rail joint service, uh, and RTD, um, have made significant amount of significant amount of progress on getting us our train that we were promised 22 years ago. Um. How old were you? Oh, um. I would have been eight when the vote came. When the vote happened, I would have been eight. And I didn’t even live in the state. Um, but I support the 116th.
Uh, stop alignment. I think 116th provides, uh, far more redevelopment opportunity than the Flatiron station is going to provide. I do personally think 116th offers, uh, more access to the rest of Broomfield than 100. 100. Sorry.
Then Flatiron Station would, given its proximity to, um, State Highway 128, slash 120th Avenue, as well as um, US 287 just right up the street. Um, but I also want to recognize that flatirons will be an important stop when RTD completes Northwest Rail, as it is required to do under state law from Senate Bill 25161.
Um, and so with that being said, I would characterize my endorsement of 116th as endorsing this to get us to a point where we have some level of service, but it is not an abdication of RTD responsibility to complete Northwest Rail, as promised in 2004 by the voters and reaffirmed by the state legislature last year. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Peterson. Thank you, mayor, and good to see you again, Mr. Taffer.
Uh, I am excited to get that Broomfield dot on the map. Uh, I’ll admit that when I first heard about the location, I was skeptical at best. But over time, I’ve come to appreciate the potential of that 116th location.
Uh, I also recognize that the area has quite a bit of housing development going on, um, both immediately around it and then, of course, across the highway at Arista. So there’ll be quite a few people, like, right there to take advantage of it. Uh, over time, I do hope to see more parking, retail and transit. Um, and, uh, and I appreciate that.
If the, uh, passenger rail ballot measure does pass that, that will allow for funds to support that. Uh, I am excited about taking the train and thankful that joint service has sweetened the deal with sidewalks. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Cohen. Thank you, mayor. Um, I think as Mrs.
Fehrenbach said, what choice is there? It seems pretty obvious, but I think it needs to be stated that, um, it’s with some consternation out of the process worked out that every other station on this line is at a commercial district except Broomfield. Um, we were told in testimony last time that you, um, worked consulted very closely with Westminster in Fort Collins on the location, but never contacted Broomfield staff.
It seems very much that Broomfield is a dot, and not much consideration has been given, I hope. 116 develops into something more, but it is noteworthy that it seems to be the least of the stations that’s being presented, and we’re giving pretty much deja vu, like the state telling us we have to take this housing.
You’re here to tell us we have to take the station location, or you might get nothing. So obviously we’re not stupid and we’ll take what we can get, but I hope the process is improved because Broomfield has paid tens of millions of dollars for transit and really has received diddly and squat so far.
I fear Council Member Ward might be as old as me if he can fathom that when there will be a train to flatirons. But I hope I’m proved wrong. So obviously I’ll vote yes because there’s no choice and I hope it all works out. Thank you very much, Council member Twiss.
Thank you. Um, so I attended the public forum at the Broomfield Community Center last Wednesday evening. Um, it was interesting and very informative. Uh, there were lots of really good questions from the community, and I wanted to say how much I appreciated the the clarity of the answers that the Front Range, uh, passenger rail folks
were able to provide. And I want to thank you for having a really great website with all of the information on it. I know that it’s sometimes very hard to find information about projects that are in progress. And, uh, it’s it’s very informative. So if anybody hasn’t been there, visit their website.
It does have a lot of really good information. That being said, I favor the 1/16, uh, location for a number of reasons. I think the five mile buffer makes a lot of sense. We, I don’t think, get to ask the in the entire line to risk intercity classification. Uh, because of a location preference that also has very significant issues.
Um, while there are a few exceptions to the five mile rule, we are not Boston or San Francisco. Um, it also slows down the train, extending the time from end to end. Um, my understanding of the the way the tracks worked is also likely safer because of the curves in the track and the crossings.
Um, the 10% bonus to the return on local, local dollar return local return dollars. Yep. Um, would be really nice. Um, we also cannot move the rail line.
Uh, many residents in Broomfield will be closer to the Lewisville station, just like residents in Westminster will be closer to ours than the one in their own city. Um, as I said in the last special session, I recognized the the value of the commercial district drop off areas. But my primary concern here is providing connectivity for Broomfield residents, not necessarily the people that we can draw in. I think that that is a primary concern for me.
Um, as mentioned previously, it is very near some of the most dense affordable housing, uh, in Broomfield, including Harvest Hill, just up the street and, uh, potentially affordable housing for veterans a block away. Um, the redevelopment areas, uh, redevelopment options in that area are exciting. Um, there’s there’s a lot of potential there. So long wrap up here.
This is a start. And we have a long way to go. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Anderson. Thank you. I very. Much appreciate the additional clarity in the presentations over time and the comments of my colleagues. Basically support all of them.
And I do support putting a dot on the map for Broomfield and appreciate the progress that has been made to ensure the needed improvements are funded. That was that was a huge part of what’s moving us to this, um, this acceptance of 1/16, um, the success of the station relies on adequate improvements for accessibility, including
adequate parking for Ada as well as non Ada. So we really can’t just have a few spots. That’s got to be significant. The parking to meet the needs. And then I still have that concern about residents exiting the train during severe weather, especially like when there’s lightning and other things and that it will only
come with time where we finally have a place they can, like, duck in and wait it out. So I keep that in the forefront of your decisions as you’re going forward. And with that, I will support 1/16 and I appreciate the time. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Anyone else? No other discussion.
Wonderful. So seeing none Council, please cast your vote electronically. Uh, and we’re voting for the 1/16 resolution. Council member McKenzie, please state your vote verbally. Yes. Thank you. All council members have entered their vote, and the results will be displayed on the screen that passes unanimously. Tend to zero. So we have passed the resolution.
Uh, for the 1/16 station, that is the station narrative supported by council. So the matter is concluded. Thank you. Gentlemen. Um. All right. Uh. Should we take a break now and then come back for the final item? Yeah. Okay.
We’re going to take a we’re going to take a ten minute recess, y’all, because this one’s going to be longer. I see people wanting to talk. So it’s 746. We’ll be back at 756 in 10 minutes. Thank you. We’re ready to power through now. If everybody wants to get back ready to power through. Welcome back from our break.
I’ll give everybody a chance to have a seat and then ready. All right. Welcome back. Our final item under Action Items this evening is council’s consideration of a resolution referring a lodging tax ballot question to the November 3rd, 2026 election. Council has a copy of the agenda memorandum, which I’ll ask our staff to summarize.
Thank you. Mayor. Um, so as as everyone that is online and in this room, as well as council for years housing’s been one of the most consistent and significant community priorities that we hear about in Broomfield.
We’ve spent considerable time listening to the residents, studying the data, discussing what role local governments should play in addressing a challenge that affects people across all ages, all incomes and all stages of life. At the same time, we should acknowledge that there’s different perspectives on the proposed lodging tax increase. Some will support it because they believe Broomfield needs a dedicated and sustainable resource to address housing.
Others will oppose the tax increase regardless of who pays and regardless of where the revenue is used. Both of these perspectives deserve to be acknowledged and respected.
Our responsibility is to put the facts forth before the community and explain the challenges that we’re trying to solve, and ultimately allow the Broomfield voters to make that decision. The challenges itself is increasingly difficult to ignore. The growing number of people that are struggling with the most basic necessity of securing housing and equally, if not more importantly, right now retaining the housing that they already have.
This includes working families, older adults who want to remain in their homes, young people beginning their careers, and members of our workforce who increasingly cannot afford to live in the community they serve. At the very same time, the need is increasing and resources available to address it are limited. And in many cases continuing to decrease, such as the property tax.
That creates a fundamental question for all of us and that is how do we respond to a growing community priority when the traditional housing and funding sources that are available continue to shrink? So the answer is not simply to place greater pressure on the general fund.
We need a balanced and thoughtful, sustainable approach, one that recognizes our financial realities while providing the community with a meaningful opportunity to address a priority that’s been repeatedly identified over the last five years. We believe that the proposed lodging tax meets meets that bar.
It would establish a dedicated source of funding paid primarily by visitors staying in Broomfield hotels, short term lodging and direct those resources specifically towards housing. It creates the opportunity to leverage outside dollars, reduce future reliance on the general fund for housing gap financing, and provides a more sustainable way to support the creation and preservation of housing opportunities. This is not about suggesting that one revenue source will solve Broomfield housing challenges.
It will not. It’s about asking whether we can create a more sustainable tool to help address them, while maintaining the fiscal discipline necessary to protect the broader needs of the community. We all know that community surveys and other forms of engagement are important, critical. They help inform our work.
They identify our priorities, and they provide valuable insight to the direction residents believe we should take. But nothing confirms a community direction and prioritization like putting a question directly before the voters with any ballot question. An election provides the clearest measure of where our majority of community rests.
Ultimately, placing this question on the ballot is not council imposing a tax increase, it’s council giving Broomfield voters the opportunity to make a decision for themselves. Whether housing is a significant community priority, to dedicate additional lodging tax revenue to those who support the proposal should have the facts. Those who oppose should have the same facts.
When we trust the voters, we respect the outcome and then we move forward based on the direction that our majority of community provides. Slide one. Please. To reiterate, tonight is a council question that is not increased. There’s a lot of communication out there right now that council’s voting tonight to to do a tax increase.
Uh, unequivocally. Clearly that is not the case. This is simply to refer a measure to our community, asking them if we should increase lodging tax to pay for housing. Slide two. We’re recommending that the November 2026 ballot have a question to improve, to increase the lodging tax. Slide three. Broomfield lodging tax right now is 1.6%.
It was approved by the voters in 1997. It was an interesting walk down memory lane. It was specific to the 96th Street interchange and Omni Hotel. All of the lodging tax was supposed to be dedicated to that. Landscaping at the Omni Hotel. And that surrounding area. Obviously, a lot has happened since 1996.
My daughter was born in 1996 and just turned 30, so updating, um, is something that from the data, from the direction balancing the community priorities, um, allows us to look at where we are in the Front Range community. That’s another big topic in the conversation right now in social media. And the emails indicating, um, that this will make us non-competitive.
Um, we’ll see in slides in just a moment that that is not the case. Next slide please. We should be on slide four. So going from 1.6 1.6 to 6. Um. When we were.
very first beginning to explore alleviating the general fund pressure and finding a sustainable revenue stream, we looked at it’s a it’s perfect timing tonight to be having the conversation with all of our nonprofits here. Uh, Broomfield succeeds because of our nonprofits. Broomfield is a community that is tightly knit. With that support structure. Because of our nonprofits.
So when we have residents that indicate that support structure, that capitalizes not only on each other, but also on local government, also on tax revenue, whether it be sales tax or property tax. We know that a Broomfield Housing Authority has established a tremendous amount of credibility in this community and outside of this community throughout the state of Colorado for what they’ve been able to achieve in a very short
period of time. They’re also able to bond. That is something a local government. We are not landlords, nor should we be. We’ve also discovered over the last five years we are not developers, nor should we be. That is not our area of expertise, but it is. Broomfield Housing Authorities area of expertise.
Being able to capitalize on these dollars. Historically, um, since the inception of Broomfield Housing Authority, they’ve been able to parlay $1 into seven. That’s not a number that we pulled out of nowhere. That is a documented. Amount through the project. So it’s a tangible amount. It’s not something we think they could achieve.
It’s something that they have achieved over the last three projects. And the upcoming two projects that they’re that this community supports and council supports, as recent as, as two weeks ago, this is going to increase from at 6% to about $3.3 million. The reason you’re able to bond.
So a lot of folks said why not sunset. You can’t sunset a tax if you have already taken bonds out on those funds. So you are looking at a tax. You have to have. No one’s going to to lend you money unless you have a sustainable revenue stream over a period of 25 to 30 years.
So it makes it difficult to sunset. Next slide please. What this proposal does and does not do. So it’s important to clarify the scope. This is not a general sales tax nor is it a property tax.
If approved by the voters, the increase applies only to short term lodging, hotels, motels in short term rentals and is paid predominantly by the visitors to Broomfield. Revenues, as we said, would be dedicated to bar and spent on voter approved. It would be a voter approved revenue stream. Again, this does not apply to the everyday resident purchases, nor businesses, Broomfield has a has 11 um hotels, more than any of our surrounding community almost combined.
Uh, we turned out to be a hub for hotels. So, uh, next slide please. So unlike the sales tax and property tax, lodging attacks, uh, again, for short term accommodations, it’s a sustainable way to capture visitor spending, ensuring the burden does not fall on our small businesses or residents that are making those everyday purchases.
You can see from the chart that this keeps Broomfield very competitive among our surrounding communities. Not only competitive, but it’s at the bottom of the range for for some of those other communities. It’s important to note that that communities have different sales tax amounts. So again, Broomfield at 8.
15%, is low from the surrounding communities that go all the way up to ten plus usually 10% sales tax. Historically, best case and best practices. You don’t you just don’t go over that 10%, um, from a sales tax perspective, that’s when you fall out of that competitive range.
We feel confident that even at 6%, we will remain hyper competitive. Um, within the the hospitality realm. Next slide please. So as we said, 1997, the tax was supporting landscape enhancements. Those projects are largely complete as they should be after 30 years. Um, and so priorities have shifted. Obviously, uh, into affordable.
I don’t even want to say affordable, attainable and returnable housing. So by shifting this revenue to VHA, we can we will be eliminating a $500,000 general fund line item right now that funds bar for their various, uh, administrative and and and various projects. Additionally, the really big ticket items is the gap financing.
So you can’t budget for gap financing, as we know, as we’re going into the 2027 budget becoming heavily reliant on a funding source that is not sustainable, such as Broomfield becoming reliant on the Eho, which is the inclusionary housing ordinance.
When you build programs based on an unsustainable revenue stream, you know there’s precipice coming because if it’s based on development and development slows, those funds will continue to shrink. That’s exactly what’s happening right now. So our plan for the 2025 budget, 2026 budget going into 2027 is identifying areas that we can shift from reliance on the Eho to the general fund.
We have no more room in the general fund in order to absorb any more of those. So the shift to a becoming fully independent, um, is also a cost savings for our general fund. Next slide please. We talked about the leveraging the $1 to $7. That isn’t just something that is on paper. Uh, a lot of, um, individuals.
It’s we have this conversation a lot when we’re talking about the enterprise funds, when we talk about the compounding nature of money, it’s not one plus one. The multiplier. The multiplier is, is, is, is enormous. When you’re talking about being able to provide that housing level support. So it’s tangible.
It’s brick and mortar, but it’s also programmatic that you’re then able to say between all of these various funding options and revenues, between the grants, between the tech, um, you then plan on what your gap financing is. Council just heard two very exciting projects. Uh, one senior housing project that’s up in baseline.
Uh, and then another compelling big heart project, uh, that that puts all of us on our toes and opens our hearts. And that’s the veterans home housing with the VHA. Everyone wants those projects. It’s identifying that gap financing. So what else doesn’t happen in order to make that happen? It’s a reallocation methodology.
This allows, again, VHA to capitalize on turning $1 of that 3.3 million into $7, consistently across the board. Next slide please. 32% of our residents are considered housing cost burden. Half of our renters and households are spending more than 30% of their income on housing. Um, Miss Tessier reminds us pretty consistently that that number, um, doesn’t quite even hit the mark.
It’s probably more like 50%. Um, if you don’t have a stable place to be safe, it’s increasingly difficult to be thinking about a job. Um, and then it’s just it’s a it’s a vicious cycle. So we have maintaining those opportunities for our first responders, uh, including my son that’s now with North Metro.
They cannot afford to be here, um, on those salaries, even five years in, they can’t afford to be here on those salaries. Our teachers, our young families.
And as I look at the mayor, our beloved seniors, which is our fastest growing population in Broomfield, so what does that mean? As we look forward on focusing on the needs for our current housing development fund? Um, and it’s projected again for a significant decrease as we’re coming into 2027, we anticipate that at the end of 2027 that I, Cho will be zero. So again, we identified the precipice, this conversation that we’re having right now is to avoid the precipice. Next slide please.
You can see here that uh, we briefly talked about the 500,000 that is, um, out of the general fund right now for VHA. Um, conversations with VHA. We also we have a swap program for those that that are unaware or those at home. Swap is our cold weather sheltering. It’s it’s hotel vouchers.
Um, those are about 275,000 with 100,000. That is, uh, for administration of that program. They will also be assuming that program, part of the conversation about where Broomfield Housing Division is and where A is, um, simply put, it will be 0 to 60%. And everything that’s included in that will be for next slide, please.
The governance structure and accountability structure remains unchanged. So a lot of conversation about the language in. We saw we talked a little bit about it with the DA’s the the DA’s language in ballot language.
For the common person you read those resolutions and you you you would need AI to translate those. You. It’s very difficult to understand what that means. Um, so the ballot language allows and the resolution, um, is giving us the legal premise to increase the lodgers tax and telling the community where that lodgers tax is going to go.
The agreement with Cob on the IGA intergovernmental agreement with Bar, along with the. Blue book, if you will, and our municipal ordinance will be the guiding document for how those funds are spent. So the the Blue Book will provide the regular voter an opportunity to understand what the ballot language means, and then counsel on their ongoing discussions and deliberations with BHA through the intergovernmental agreements,
as well as following our municipal codes, will then determine how those funds, under what circumstances they are spent. Broomfield Council will continue to appoint the the Bar board. They will continue to provide annual. Audits and where those funds are being spent.
Um, and we know that bar is consistently fielding questions on the how the what the where, the when, the why and being a good neighbor. Miss Heizer. Next slide please. In conclusion, staff recommends the adoption of this resolution, referring the question to the November 3rd, 2026 election. Once adopted, Colorado campaign finance law prohibits the use of any public funds.
Facilities, employee time to advocate for or against this measure. Staff will remain limited in providing and other than providing factual, objective information, and all individuals, including counsel, will be free to express personal views on their own time. We just can’t use city money to be advocating for or against any particular project with that.
Happy to open the floor for council for any additional questions and or comments. Thank you very much, Manager Hoffman, for that. Excellent summary. We’re going to start with public comments. If anyone would like to speak on this item, please make your way to the podium. Um, state your name and neighborhood for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. Please.
Good evening, mayor, mayor Pro Tem and City Council, thank you for this opportunity to speak. My name is Neil Passarelli, and as you may know, over the past four years, I’ve spent much of my time here in Broomfield working with local nonprofits, including fish, Broomfield Teen Council and Fish’s Youth Engagement Squad.
Um, specifically targeting and working with programs that regard youth and housing security and food security. I also just graduated from high school, so youth issues are both very important and personal to me. And so when we talk about housing security, our young people are among some of the most vulnerable and important in this issue.
More than half of Phish’s participants are under the age of 18, and they can’t vote to change their circumstances or affect policies regarding housing or food security.
So it is up to us and is our responsibility to consider not only how we can best support our youth, but also our most vulnerable residents through both our tax dollars and our votes on the ballot. Because housing isn’t just an issue that is affecting the select few, both here in Broomfield and in Colorado.
In the 2025 Community Survey, 70% of respondents said housing costs in Broomfield are too high, with median home prices around 664,000 and rents averaging more than $2,100 per month. Nearly half of local renters are cost burdened, as the city manager, Jan Hoffman, just said.
And on top of that, more than 88% of the people who keep our city running, including teachers, paramedics, nurses and service workers commute from outside of Broomfield because living here just isn’t realistic anymore. We have a clear housing challenge, but local and local taxpayers shouldn’t have to carry the burden of solving this issue alone. Which brings me to the lodging tax ballot question. What sets this proposal proposal apart is that it addresses a local need without directly taxing local residents.
The check in for housing proposal offers a smart, sustainable solution by increasing the lodging tax on hotel stays and short term rentals from 1.6% to 6% for Broomfield residents, that puts the direct cost at $0. It does not increase residential property taxes, rent or general sales taxes. Instead, visitors contribute towards the community and infrastructure they use while they stay here.
It also makes our existing dollars work more efficiently. The proposal eliminates over $500,000 from the annual general fund support for housing operations. The Broomfield Housing Alliance would expand services for households earning 0 to 60% of the area median income, and take over funding for the severe Weather Activation Program or swap moving development.
Gap financing to Bay could also free between 1 to $2 million per project in the Housing Development Fund. And importantly, this is not a blank check. Council retains authority to establish spending caps, income targets and annual outcome metrics. Can you please wrap up your time’s expired you three minutes is up.
Whether it’s a young family trying to build a future or a worker trying to afford rent, this program would both strengthen our entire community and solve a critical issue. Thank you, Council for considering this measure and I urge you to refer this measure to the ballot. Thank you. Thank you very much. Roxy. Nakamura.
I’m all for this. This answers a lot of my questions that I’ve had for the group for a long time is where the money is coming from. And how much of that you’re going to expect. The regular taxpayers that work hard for their money to have to give to everybody else. So I will be backing this.
You’ll see me on the street with a yes to everybody. You’ll see me in the stores and the restaurants and stuff, and I will be back in this. Here’s one alternative that is going to probably happen. We do have a couple of our lodging areas here that are at a lower rate.
Most of those will probably survive, but there might be 1 or 2 that don’t. So the group needs to understand that that money that has been expected to come into their pocket may not be the same amount every year. Now, then again, if we can get some conventions and some businesses in here to help fill our lodging, it might be even more.
And then we can do even more better. I’m just happy that the local people, maybe in the future, won’t have to have it coming out of their pocket so that they can have many going elsewhere. Um, and there’s lots. We have streets, we have buildings, we have all kinds of things. Money.
There’s always a place for the money to go in the city and county, and we’re still growing, so we’ll always have a place for it. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. I’m Dan McCauley. I live in Ward three, and I am the executive director for the Flatirons area. Habitat for humanity.
Um, manager Hoffman took most of my talking points, so thank you for that. Um, for another purpose, I was doing some research a year ago when my partner and I bought our home north of the high school.
The ratio between our home purchase price and our income was a little over 2 to 1 for the family’s habitat serves those families who are buying homes, buying homes with an income of 80% of our area mean income. The mean purchase price in Broomfield is over five times their income. That is an insurmountable gap.
So I ask you, as you consider referring this measure, what happens to Broomfield when the only people who can afford to live here are the people who bought their homes 20 years ago and couldn’t afford to buy them today? I encourage you to refer this matter. Thank you very much. So I’m not sure if my comments are going to help. Since Roxy got up here, I don’t think anything else needs to be said.
Uh, good evening everyone. I’m Martin Dorman. I live in Ward one, and as a longtime housing advocate here in Broomfield, I remember when the idea of proposing, let alone referring a measure such as the lodging tax item under consideration tonight seemed impossible.
I remember when a sitting city council member stated publicly that Broomfield intentionally zoned for affluence. I remember when civic leaders routinely denied the fact that Broomfield has any residents experiencing homelessness or housing instability. And so I’m glad to be here tonight to note that things are changing. Thank you.
Council and staff alike, for being a part of that change and for being willing to dialogue with me and many other housing advocates, including those who are here this evening about what it could look like to identify new sources of funding to improve housing outcomes in our community. So tonight, Council, I urge you to help us all take an important step forward for Broomfield Housing.
Please check in for housing by voting yes on referral of tonight’s measure to this fall’s ballot. Thank you. Thank you. Hello, I am Kelly Martindale. She her pronouns. I am a leader with together Colorado and a resident of Broomfield and Mira monte ranch condominiums.
I’m a supporter of having a lodging tax be added to the ballot for November. This is a great way to support the housing needs for our community. Thank you for entrusting BHA to continue leveraging funds to maximize impact. I’m thankful for their ability to include all in need on the housing spectrum from the unhoused, seniors, veterans, and all those in between.
Giving everyone dignity, support and care where they are at the. Health. Happiness and well-being of a community is both measured and affected by how we treat the vulnerable and economically disadvantaged. This increase shows we care and where our priorities are.
Personally, I don’t look at taxes when I go traveling and look at places, so I really don’t think that 6% increase is going to change because I go on location and are the rates good and oh, the taxes and percentage will affect me later and that just comes. But it’s not a consideration when I travel. So thank you Council for your help moving this forward. Thank you very much. Thanks for. Good evening.
Mayor. and council. I’m Kristin Heizer, executive director of the Broomfield Housing Alliance. I’m here to make a commitment to our partners and to our community. I want to emphasize one important point. As you consider. This action this evening, this is not simply about funding, bar. It is about investing in Broomfield. Housing needs.
A dedicated housing investment fund would give our community a flexible. local source resource to create and preserve housing support, housing stability programs, leverage outside dollars and pursue solutions that responds to Broomfield very specific needs and priorities. VHA is positioned to steward and deploy these visitor generated revenues.
As an independent housing authority, we have legal and financial tools beyond those typically available to a city, including acquiring land, borrowing and lending, issuing tax exempt debt, developing housing and accessing outside funding. Those tools allow us to make local dollars work harder for Broomfield, but the intended beneficiary is the broader community.
Our workers, older adults who want to remain here, people experiencing housing instability, people with disabilities who need accessible and stable housing, and young families trying to build their lives here. We recognize that public investment comes with public responsibility, and we take that very seriously.
As a housing authority, Barr is bound by Colorado state statute and operates within a highly regulated environment with requirements for financial oversight, reporting, auditing, transparency and accountability. Accountability. We are deeply appreciative of this proposal and of the trust being placed in VHA to steward such an important community resource. We take that responsibility seriously, and we’re committed to ensuring residents can see where these resources go and what they accomplish. We’re also eager to connect with anyone to answer questions.
Here are concerns and ideas. Work together to design a housing investment fund that is transparent, accountable, measurable, and responsive to our community’s housing needs. This is an opportunity to turn visitor generated revenue into long term investment, and the people who call Broomfield home appreciates city’s leaders proposal.
City Council’s consideration to defer a large lodging tax ballot question to the November ballot. VHA is poised and ready to serve as the vehicle to administer and invest these valuable resources on behalf of our community in a manner that is transparent, accountable and maximizes the impact these funds offer. Broomfield. To meet our shared housing needs and priorities. Thank you very much. Thank you very. Much. My name.
Is Mark Vedova. I’m from Edgewater and I, um, I lived outside the United States for eight years, and I recently came back six months ago, and I was able to save $55,000, working for eight years in a different country. I came back here and I wanted to open.
I wanted to use my money to open hospitality house. I had $50,000. My friend said to me, you can’t do anything with $50,000 a year. And I was like, what? So it broke my heart. A weep for America. And I. I really, I admire one of the most powerful people I think, that ever lived in America is a woman named Dorothy Day.
She was a she was a 20th century social activist. And she, she did, um, work with the poor in New York during the Great Depression. She started when she was in her 30s. She died in her 80s. And she did that work for 50 years. She did it.
She started in the midst of right after the Great Depression in America. She died in like 1980. And she’s one of my heroes. And, um, and I and I really struggle with the United States of America, and I struggle with being a white European man. That’s who I am.
And and a lot of people who have the money, uh, are white European men in this country. And, uh, and I, I really plead with the United States of America and their leaders to give funding to hospitality houses.
I worked through the refuge in Colorado and, and, and my hope would be that, that the United States would think about works of mercy for the poor and and giving massive amounts of money, taxpayers dollars to, to, um, for houses of hospitality where I want to I want to live with the poor like the poor. I’m tired of people seeing people live in cars, live outside.
I’m tired of seeing people die because they freeze in the winter. And it breaks my heart. And I just mourn for the United States of America because. Because a lot of people don’t care about works of mercy, you know, feeding people, clothing people, giving people a shower, showing people human dignity, you know, and, uh, and I don’t care about class, I don’t care.
I think that’s all made up. I think it’s all just ridiculous propaganda stuff. And we’re all human. And I think that my my plea to, to everyone is that, um, I would love to see funding going to hospitality houses where people could live for free. They don’t have to pay $500,000, $1,500 and all that.
So I just, um, being in America, I got 20s left. I’ll finish up being in America for six months has broken my heart every day. It’s hard for me to live as an American. I’m so tired of some of the greed, the apathy, the ignorance.
And I plead for some funding for house to hospitality for the poor. Thank you. Thank you very much. Was there anyone else who would like to be heard? All right, we’ll go on to council. Questions next. Do any of my colleagues have any questions? None. I guess your presentation was pretty thorough. Council member McKenzie, who? Oh. Councilmember Cohen.
Thank you. Mayor. Just a quick question. I just the only part that I’m questioning you, I’m sure you have a great explanation is swap going to be hey, because it feels like it’s not a in there expertise because it’s emergency housing, which is something they do not do.
So can you explain that or how that would work or why we’re doing that? It’s a similar program that utilizes vouchers. So they administer section eight vouchers. It’s not unlike although the population may be different, the administration of the voucher program is very similar. The distribution would remain with mostly police. The distribution would be with almost home.
There are partner that’s in Adams County now. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Henkel. Thank you mayor. Um, maybe we’ve asked this question before, but I’m curious as to what other areas use their tax. Um, for this, their lodging tax, where they allocate their dollars for. Broomfield will be the first to allocate their lodging tax specifically to their housing authority.
So do we have a thumb on what other areas use their lodging tax for? Generally it comes into the general fund for everything from economic development, which may include housing and or housing programs, um, support for all of the eco devo um enhancement programs. There’s. So it’s from 0 to 50.
Council member Hinkle. Um but but generally most of them come back into the, uh, into the general fund. Okay. So that sounds like I won’t I won’t give an opinion about that. Thank you. All right. Any other questions from my colleagues? Seeing none.
Next is council’s consideration of proposed resolution number 2026. Dash 105. Will the clerk please read the proposed resolution by title. Seven D referring a ballot question to the registered electors at the November 3rd, 2026 election seeking authorization for the City and County of Broomfield to raise the current lodging tax from 1.
6% to 6%, with all future revenues to the dedicated excuse me revenues to be dedicated for use by the Housing Authority for the City and County of Broomfield. Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the resolution? Council member Henkel. So moved. Thank you. Is there a second Council member? Twiss. Second? Thank you. Is there any discussion? Council member Henkel. Thank you. Mayor. Um, I’m excited about this.
Um, I think that this is a wise decision to put this on the ballot, to let people decide what they want to do, because a lot of times we hear so many times, let’s elevate housing. And I completely agree. VHA has established themselves as a very credible, um, resource for Broomfield.
I do want to add that maybe later on. I just came from California. Um, they had a lot of different, um, they had one large tax on there that was like $20 a day. I don’t think we’re going to be that much, obviously.
Um, but they did have like a sales tax and it went towards economic workforce development and things like that. And then they had other fees on there. There was actually a, a whole Sacramento fee added to it. So I’ll share that with, with everyone just so that they can realize to what other people do with either lodging taxes and or fees.
I would like to reiterate that with housing, we also need jobs. So I would like to see something in the future, either as a fee and or some sort of allocation to develop workforce and economic development and job creation would be wonderful for Broomfield. Thank you so much for being here tonight, all of you, for sticking it out.
You didn’t have to stick it out until 11:00 tonight. Sometimes our meetings go that late, and I just really wanted to thank you all for giving your opinions and really voicing your concerns. Um, I grew up unseen, unhoused, and I know what it’s like to have housing insecurity.
And so I just really appreciate you guys just constantly showing up. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Peterson. Thank you, mayor. Uh, some of the members of our community have expressed concern about such a dramatic increase in the lodging tax.
And though the jump is big, it represents that Broomfield is honestly kind of been behind in adjusting overtime to match the rates of our surrounding areas. And even this jump makes us below average, uh, in comparison to our neighbors. So I’m honestly not concerned that it will negatively affect businesses or our local hotels.
Um, I also appreciate that the additional funds will not rest primarily on our Broomfield residents, but our visitors that come, um, and that the income, uh, from housing, our guests will be used to house our residents. Um, I’ve been very impressed with the Broomfield housing authorities ability to leverage state and federal funds over.
Um, and multiply that funding that they have received over the past several years from the Inclusive Housing Ordinance. Uh, and they created extensive housing units in Broomfield already, which is great. Um, but those funds are just not guaranteed and can’t be depended on. And so to have a stable income will make a huge difference.
Um, and by diverting these funds to this, uh, tested and trusted organization, um, they’ll be able to do what they do best, uh, create housing solutions for Broomfield, specifically for those that make 0 to 60% of the area median income. So I’m excited about that. Thank you very much. Councilmember Delgadillo. Thank you. Mayor.
Um, I’ll say that, uh, evidently greed and apathy are not in the house tonight. So thank you all for being here. Um, and for reminding us that this this is a community value. If we care about being inclusive, we need to be willing to spend money on it. A budget is a moral document. It says what we care about as a community.
And unless we are willing to put our money where our mouth is, we cannot claim that inclusivity, housing, making sure this is a place for everyone is something that’s important to us. So thank you all for showing up and showing your support for this.
It really does make a huge difference and very excited to refer this to the ballot. Um, and I plan on spending my own personal time outside of council, uh, knocking on doors. Whatever we need to make this successful. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Anderson. Okay. Um. Thank you.
I will start by saying that I support the lodging tax, and it is still low compared to our neighboring jurisdictions. My only real question here is regarding the Blue Book and what will go in to that to help.
There’s a lot of questions circulating out there, and, um, ensuring that these helping to understand that the limited funds coming from the included Inclusive housing ordinance, um, have aren’t, aren’t as high as they once were, that there is that there is a need here to be filled. The guardrails that are in place that these dollars are not going to go to administrative costs, that they actually are going to make it out there.
And also the leveraging of the the dollar and the the great greater impact that it has. Is that all going to go into the Blue book or is that can that not go there? Because it has to be balanced? Uh, Councilmember Anderson, thanks for. That question. We started doing this last year.
We created it’s our we call it the Blue Book, but it’s our local publication. So it’s not something created by the state. And the good thing about that is we have editorial control. Um, we have the right now we have three questions on the ballot. So we have the space to offer as much information as we can.
And it’s what’s needed for the voters. So the plan in creating the Blue Book was not only using the memo that was created tonight. Manager Hoffman’s slide deck, the comments that we heard this evening, the emails that we received with questions, will utilize all that to try to create a really succinct, helpful document.
The other thing that we did last year, and we can repeat it this year, is that we did some training with our election judges. Again, not to advocate or oppose any ballot question, but just to try to help point somebody in the right direction for information. Since this is all locally controlled.
We have a we have a lot of flexibility in how we share this information. It’s also a resource we’ll include on our website. We’ll have printed versions. We’d also make the versions available in various buildings across the community, and we’ll utilize Bre to help share this document as much as we can.
And thank you for the clarification on the educating the election judges and those booklets and and the clarification that they’re not actually blue. So but thank you for that. And, um, appreciate it. It’s white with blue highlights, branding for Broomfield. Um all right. Thank you.
Any other discussion? I probably won’t have to vote on this, but I’m in complete support. Uh, for the last nine years, I’ve been saying, you know, we can signal all we want, but we have to put skin in the game. And incrementally over the years, we have put more and more skin in the game.
And now we’re asking our community if you care about this issue, put skin in the game, vote yes on this, vote for this so we can continue, uh, to make progress and fill these gaps. And I plan on doing a lot of volunteer work as well. So excited. And I hope Council agrees. Um, so let’s get to the vote on the proposed resolution.
Number 2026105. Will the clerk please read the proposed resolution? Oh, we did that already. So now we’re at the vote. Uh, Council, please cast your vote electronically. And Council Member McKenzie, please state your vote verbally. Yes. Thank you. And that passes unanimously. And now, back to neutral. So, um, congratulations, everyone.
We’ve got work to do, and I’m just so grateful for you all for being here. Thank you. Well, there are no mayor or council member requests for future action this evening. Is there any other business to come before the council from my colleagues or staff, there being no further business, the council meeting is adjourned.