[0:00] work session. >> Okay. Um throughout the last few years,

[0:07] I think there's been different times that council has either been made aware

[0:11] of interested um individuals uh volunteering on our advisory boards or

[0:17] sometimes I think you've accidentally even interviewed some individuals that

[0:21] would have been a great addition to an advisory board only to find out that

[0:25] they don't live in Alamosa County. Um, and what we've run into a few times is

[0:32] individuals that might work full-time or own a business, but they don't live in

[0:36] Alamosa County, which means they're not eligible. Or we may have individuals

[0:41] that live in Alamosa County um, but they're working um, at center or

[0:47] somewhere else and and they don't have that other nexus and therefore couldn't

[0:52] qualify to be on our advisory board. And let me back up a little bit. Our

[0:57] advisory boards used to be that you had to live within the city limits and

[1:02] council at one point in time felt like you know there's a lot of great minds

[1:07] out there that care about the community want to volunteer why don't we take the

[1:11] step of opening that up a little bit and what we did is we took it to the voters

[1:17] because it is in the charter and it allows someone who's living within

[1:20] Alamosa County so that's the first standard is they have to live within

[1:24] Alamosa County that either owns a business, property, or works full-time

[1:30] within city limits. So, someone has to meet both of those criteria right now to

[1:36] serve on um a board. I think when you guys came across some of these

[1:41] individuals um that would have been neat to have on the board, you said in

[1:46] passing maybe we should relook at this and maybe we should open it up to where

[1:51] if you live in the valley um type of situation that you would be open to

[1:56] having them on a board. You would still have your own checks and balances. You'd

[2:00] still do the interviews. It's still your decision who you appoint to a board um

[2:05] type of situation. staff doesn't really have much of an opinion on this, but if

[2:11] it is something that council's interested in wanting to change and make

[2:14] it to where it is more open and you want to do it this year for the election, we

[2:19] kind of need to know that so we can start preparing and making sure the same

[2:23] time we're doing education on the street sales tax that we also um do similar

[2:29] education for for this so people understand why it's coming before them.

[2:34] So, with that, I'll I'll put it back to council, but just as a reminder, there's

[2:38] there's the two different criterias, Alamosa County, and then they have to

[2:43] either own property, work full-time, or own a business. So, that's the current

[2:48] criteria. So, Mary, I'll turn it over. >> Time. The expanded criteria is the St.

[2:53] Louis Valley, right? >> So, you need to talk, you would want to

[2:56] talk through if you want to change both of those. So, do you want to make the

[3:00] whole San Louis Valley, which is okay, but that means um I think you

[3:05] interviewed a gentleman who lived in Rio Grand but worked full-time at ASU. He

[3:11] would then qualify type of situation. But the other example we had, we had

[3:16] someone who lives right in East Alamosa, works for a different school district.

[3:21] Since they don't do any of those other three, they still would not be eligible.

[3:26] So, you would want to talk through if you want to change both of those

[3:30] criteria or not. >> Okay.

[3:33] » So, just to be clear, it's not >> Can you talking to the mic?

[3:37] » Just to be clear, it's not that you want to change it. You can't do that change,

[3:40] but it's what issue do you want to propose to the voters because it's a

[3:44] charter change. So, you're not doing anything other than proposing if you

[3:49] want to a question to the voters. >> Okay. All right. So, I'll open it up to

[3:56] council. You could just turn your mics on and we'll we'll talk a little bit

[3:59] about it. Anybody has any first comments? I'll start off. Looks like

[4:03] Carson and then Krebs, you want to go first?

[4:07] » Um, mine's a quick 30 second. Um I'm just thinking just for matter of time if

[4:13] we want to talk about one of the components first like the valley type

[4:18] thing and then once we figure that out then we move on to the second one and

[4:21] that way we're not confusing each other and bouncing back and forth.

[4:25] » That would be my only suggestion but whatever.

[4:30] » But other than that I'll turn it. >> Let me see what he had to say.

[4:34] Okay. I'm just kind of looking for

[4:37] clarification and and forgive me if I'm not getting it, but so so we're wanting

[4:41] to come up with language for the ballot because we have to pitch this to the

[4:45] voters if we're going to change it. And >> if you want to make a change, if you

[4:48] don't want to make a change, then we we don't do anything. But if you do want to

[4:52] make a change, we do have to take it to the voters because it's in the charter.

[4:56] » So it would be us wanting to make Hold on. If we want to make a change, we have

[5:02] to come up with a language, put it on the ballot, then the voters will vote on

[5:06] yes or no, whether they want to change the charter. That's a municipal vote. Or

[5:09] do county resip vote?

[5:12] » Yeah. >> Um

[5:16] Okay. All right. >> All right. I don't see any other mics.

[5:22] So, we'll kind of take into consideration um what councelor Kreb

[5:27] said so we don't get too confused. But I just want to ask one question of

[5:31] clarification. So let's use this example. It's a recent

[5:35] example. Um as far as a youth advisory member being on the board, um a parent

[5:41] reached out to me that's lives in Rio Grand County and their kid goes to

[5:45] school in Monav Vista, but they're really active. They really want to be

[5:49] active in um politics and learning from other political leaders and being on

[5:55] boards. Would that youth be able to be on a Alamosa advisory board? If we do

[6:00] the St. Louis Valley, allow St. Louis Valley participants to be on our

[6:04] advisory committee. >> You would have to change both. So, you

[6:07] have to change the part that says they can be from the valley.

[6:11] » Okay. >> Um outside of Alamosa County

[6:13] essentially, and then you have to change the part that they don't have to be here

[6:18] full time type of thing. >> Be here full time. And that's what we

[6:21] would be discussing about being on a ballot if we were to do both. if you

[6:25] want to do both. Yes. Or you can choose to do one

[6:28] » or none. >> And I'm gonna give one more real

[6:30] example. Every year, um, councelor Yan Vehill has his group of students from

[6:37] center come in and and they're real active and they follow up and reach out

[6:42] wanting to be more involved too. So that's once again would be something

[6:45] changing both. If a student from uh center wanted to participate on some of

[6:51] our our advisory committees down the road as a youth,

[6:54] » you would need to change both of those. >> Okay. I just want to give that

[6:57] classification. Okay. Council cars. Um so,

[7:07] and this is purely for clarification. Um for example, I'm going to use a real

[7:11] world person like Ruthie right now. Ruthie Brown. Ruthie Brown does not

[7:16] qualify right now. >> He qualifies right now.

[7:18] » Does qualify to be on the board. Okay. So, that's kind of the criteria I'm

[7:22] trying to >> Okay. So,

[7:23] » basically, we're just we're just going to expand Alamosa County if we make any

[7:26] change at all. We're going to expand from Mosa to the valley.

[7:30] » Yes.

[7:33] » I think that's board applicable. You know what I mean? I think that's that's

[7:37] kind of I mean I get it's got to be one big broad stroke but um like what if

[7:45] there's a board that is you know you need input on living in the municipality

[7:49] or >> then don't appoint somebody that's not

[7:52] going to match up. >> So just wait them out in the criteria in

[7:55] the in the >> you're not forced to appoint anybody.

[7:58] It's just saying who's eligible to apply and serve if you appoint them.

[8:05] Okay. And and I'm just thinking through legalities right here. So if I'm a

[8:09] constituent and and we're looking for something municipality rep, I mean, you

[8:14] know, city Alamosa proper rep and that's what part of the criteria is, then this

[8:19] non-Alamosa proper rep would that's interviewing would not fit that

[8:23] criteria. So that would legally cover us from any um like discriminatory

[8:30] » accusation. So, so what they're saying, councelor Carson, is that ultimately

[8:34] it's us who decide who are on these advisory committees. It just expands our

[8:39] reach to get a bigger pool of people. >> Yeah, you asked an interesting question.

[8:44] » Yeah, I'm just I'm just thinking about the legalities.

[8:46] » I don't think it's that interesting. >> Oh, it is.

[8:48] » I to you guys can't discriminate against

[8:52] people on protected classes, right? But if you interview individuals and you

[8:59] don't feel any of them would be a good fit for the board for reasons that are

[9:03] not related to protected classes, you don't have to appoint anybody regardless

[9:08] where they live, regardless where they work, all anything like that. So the

[9:12] only thing from a legal perspective for discrimination is protected classes. But

[9:17] if you feel like someone who lives in Alamosa interviews very well and would

[9:23] be a better fit than the person interviewing for Monav Vista, that is

[9:27] your prerogative. >> Yeah, but that doesn't keep them from

[9:30] pulling any sort of card at all. You know what I mean? I'd like to hear the

[9:33] lawyer the opinion ma'am. I'm sorry. >> No, Heather's right. People can sue for

[9:38] whatever they want. And if someone's going to sue based on not being

[9:41] appointed, they would have to point to age, sex, race, uh, gender, orientation,

[9:50] you know, one of those protected classes.

[9:52] » But the reason I said it's an interesting question is Boulder is being

[9:55] sued right now, uh, because they kicked someone off of their board for

[10:02] essentially working with someone suing the city. and that person is suing

[10:08] Boulder on First Amendment free speech grounds. I think they're going to lose

[10:15] both free speech grounds and uh due process that that they were

[10:20] deprived of a property interest without due process. I think they're going to

[10:24] lose. I think they should lose, but that's an issue that gets raised

[10:28] sometimes. >> And I got that. But the thing is is

[10:31] there's still the reckoning with it. You understand what I'm saying? Well, so

[10:34] explain to me what >> that's the same no matter what your you

[10:39] you've just expanded the potential number of people, but you haven't

[10:43] changed those kinds of grounds for a lawsuit at all. You haven't increased

[10:48] our liability at all by doing that. >> Okay. And and I mean All right. I I get

[10:54] what you're saying. >> All right. Thank you.

[10:57] » Thank you, Councelor Carson, Councelor Hensley, and Councelor Cribs.

[11:01] So, having been on CML and seeing a lot of

[11:06] things that happen in other cities and towns, one of the things that there's a

[11:11] couple things that concern me on this and the first one is I don't see it

[11:15] happening here, this whole political type of thing, but there are in the

[11:20] larger cities where they bring in certain people from a political

[11:24] standpoint and they campaign and or um try to get on certain boards or get

[11:29] voted in because they have a specific motive. So, it concerns me a little just

[11:35] that you could have a different city or something that has a alter ulterior

[11:41] method or reasoning to getting onto one of our boards that may not have to do

[11:46] with our city. So, what that leads me to really believe I kind of like the way

[11:51] it's set up now. I potentially could be open to the idea of going outside of

[11:55] Elamosa, but I feel like they need to have a reason. And I know this kind of

[12:00] dis this um doesn't allow for the students maybe as much, which does bum

[12:06] me out a little, but the bottom line is I think they need to have some real

[12:10] teeth in the game of having a business here or working full-time here or

[12:15] something, not just be a St. Louis Valley um resident who is interested in

[12:21] Alamos. I just feel like that can open up some cans of worms in the future that

[12:26] we may may not be aware of. So I guess that would be my concern.

[12:31] » Hey, thank you uh councelor Hansy for your comments. Councelor Crebs and then

[12:35] councelor Carson. >> Thank you mayor.

[12:38] » I guess um for my comment um as it relates to um what

[12:44] if we choose this person over that person? The application questions that

[12:49] we ask don't address those at all. We don't mention anything like that. So, we

[12:54] would actually have no idea unless they offer that information in the interview

[13:00] about where they're from type thing. While I agree with um councelor Hensley

[13:06] to a little bit that there is some risk involved, I think that we might benefit

[13:12] by opening up the and making it bigger even if it's slightly bigger. And I

[13:19] don't want to exclude any counties and I don't not sure if I really wanted to do

[13:23] it by counties but I think we are missing a a good potential especially

[13:28] when it does come to the youth and and when we get to exclusions I mean

[13:33] I we could even say that youth of a certain age if they want to serve on a

[13:38] board are excluded from the full-time obviously or maybe be a full-time

[13:43] student or something of that nature. Um, but other than that, I'm

[13:49] I'm I'm listening, but I'm really not seeing too much of the downside of

[13:54] opening it up to the entire county >> or valley. Sorry.

[13:59] » Thank you, Council Kribs. And um, Miss Martinez, for clarification purposes,

[14:04] can you clarify, if I'm not mistaken, when they fill out application, isn't

[14:08] that information on there that you put in the packet with us?

[14:11] » Yes. >> Shows exactly what I just wanted to make

[14:13] sure. >> Yeah.

[14:15] Yep. >> All right.

[14:16] » Ask them because usually it's an address or they have to state they're in the

[14:19] city or county. So, we have to ask them. >> Okay. Thank you. And councelor Carson

[14:24] and councelor Martinez. >> Um,

[14:31] is there I guess what I would ask Heather is um

[14:38] what uh what are the real positives that you see with this? like what are the

[14:43] what I mean not not to put you on the spot but I you know when I was asking

[14:48] the other question it would seem like you know what I'm saying like what are

[14:52] me just enlighten me a little bit as to what opening this pool up does because

[14:56] again I I I do we saw it in real time with Douglas County and the way they

[15:00] built their waterboard and the way people were just drawn in from different

[15:04] towns and and and they were greasing people in real time. it was like right

[15:08] happening right in front of our eyes. And so that is a really valid point that

[15:12] Liz brings up. People are, you know, this is a political world and it doesn't

[15:17] always have to be red or blue. It can be money or or water or, you know, whatever

[15:22] it is. And so, um, it is it is a risk that we take when we open that up. So,

[15:28] I'm just curious what what are the positives to doing this, I guess.

[15:32] And so I I if and again I I don't necessarily think it's broken. So

[15:40] this is more coming from I think you interviewed a really um energetic

[15:47] individual um that lived in Rio Grand but worked full-time at ASU and would

[15:52] have I think some of the comments I heard would have been a great addition

[15:56] to whatever board they were applying for. Um, so it it it could be that there

[16:02] are some neat individuals out there that have passions that align with some of

[16:06] our boards um and they're willing to do it. I know this isn't your question, but

[16:12] conversely, I don't there are I was going to say I'm not

[16:16] sure we're we're not getting enough volunteers, but there might be a few

[16:20] boards that we do struggle a little bit more than other boards.

[16:24] » Okay. Okay. So then I asked this, is it possible, Eric, for you to come up with

[16:28] language that changes the charter enough to where we have the freedom to make

[16:33] those choices on a more dynamic basis than we do now? You know what I mean?

[16:38] Like I don't know if that helps or not. >> Oh, I'm confused by So right now you

[16:44] guys do the interview and you appoint who you think it needs to be. There's

[16:49] nothing forcing you to appoint certain people or who to appoint not to appoint.

[16:54] So that wouldn't change. All this does is give you a bigger pool of applicants.

[16:59] » I get that. When I was talking about the legal risks, I wasn't necessarily

[17:03] talking about protected classes. I was talking about the the the agenda driven

[17:08] people that could say we didn't put them on this board for reason A, B, or C. So,

[17:12] if you don't think there's risk of that, I mean, that was more my concern was

[17:16] protecting us from something like Liz brought up is because you do have people

[17:19] with agendas that could want to they may want to change the library. They may

[17:24] want to change, you know what I mean, the trails, you know, they may want to

[17:28] change ATV rules. You know what I'm saying? And you might have somebody that

[17:32] gets on the board. You understand what I'm saying? As as Don pointed out, if

[17:36] you do, if the voters approve this change,

[17:41] you may want to revisit the kinds of questions that you ask, especially of

[17:45] people who don't have an obvious >> tie to Allar to try to get at why the

[17:51] heck do you want to >> volunteer your time to serve, you know,

[17:55] spend five hours a month driving 50 miles to serve on one of our advisory

[18:00] boards, which doesn't even get to do anything. But if someone interviews for

[18:04] the library board and they think they say, "I'm running because I think that

[18:09] the library is a mess and it needs a new direction and all of that and and you

[18:14] guys don't agree with that." Then you probably don't think it's going to be a

[18:17] good fit to put them on the library board. That's not a legally protected

[18:21] class. >> I got you. So, I guess my my question

[18:26] are over. I I would leave it to you guys to figure out if you want to change

[18:30] that. If you think it's not broken, like Heather said, if it's not broken, then

[18:33] why are we trying to fix it? But I mean, you know, I'm not whatever you guys

[18:38] think. I'm I guess I'm game with just support whatever you guys think because

[18:43] everybody have valid points. But again, this brings up good point.

[18:46] » All right. Thank you, Council Gar. Let's go to Council Martinez. So, I'm just

[18:51] thinking about some of the points you brought up, which isn't legal like Eric

[18:55] said, but it's optics and and um I know we're taking it to the voters and

[19:03] they'll approve it or they won't. But then if people that apply from the city

[19:07] of Alamos are like, "We applied, but you chose this person from Monav Vista." The

[19:12] city council is going against they're not even taking people from Alamos in

[19:16] consideration. And it's not a legal issue because we can choose whoever we

[19:19] we want. But then it becomes optics and that the city is not representing the

[19:23] city and it becomes kind of a political issue because you know

[19:28] we are we're not appointed we're elected. So that's one thing. And then

[19:33] as far as Liz's comment goes, I think people can interview really well and

[19:38] then turn out to be something completely different. So we can say, "Hey, this

[19:42] person loves the library board. They think our library is great." and then

[19:46] they come in and we hear well Monavista does theirs this way or we do it this

[19:51] way here and then we have to deal with that kind of crap. So, I think maybe

[19:55] opening it up to the county, people who live within the county, cuz they do, I

[20:02] mean, people in East Talamosa have to shop in the city. You know, people in

[20:07] Monavista don't have to shop in the city. They do a lot of times because

[20:12] most a lot of times they work here, but they don't have to shop here. People in

[20:17] East Amos, they kind of do. There's not a whole lot out there that they can get

[20:22] elsewhere. So that's just my thoughts. >> And good thoughts. Good thought. Good

[20:27] thoughts. Uh council cribs, >> let me throw this out here. At the

[20:31] beginning you said that there there are two requirements. One is the location

[20:34] and the other one is um work full-time, own a business. What if it was one or

[20:40] the other? they would still have a tie to Alamosa

[20:44] in some way, either financially owning a business or working here or they live

[20:49] here and they might work in center at the school, you know, that kind of

[20:55] thing. So that way we can capture people that have a vested interest in

[21:01] » Say it one more time. Say it one more time.

[21:03] » So if I'm understanding correctly, we still have you have to live in Alamosa

[21:09] County. So if they meet that criteria, that alone would allow them to be on it.

[21:14] And instead of it being an and it would be an or. So if they live in Alamosa

[21:20] County but work at a different school district because they live in Alamosa

[21:24] County, they would still qualify. And since it's an or if they own a business,

[21:30] own property, or work full-time, there's three. Thank you. It doesn't matter

[21:34] where they live within the valley as long as they're meeting one of those

[21:38] three criteria. So it changes the and to an or

[21:46] that's municipal state. >> Okay. One more time with the R. So I

[21:52] understand Alamosa County if they live in Alamosa County and R. Say it one more

[21:57] time. >> Okay. So right now it's an and which

[22:01] means you have to live in Alamosa County and you have to either own property, a

[22:07] business or work full-time >> because it's an and

[22:11] » well or or live in the city. If you live in the city, that's all.

[22:14] » Yeah, that's all you need to live in the city. Okay.

[22:17] » So anyways, so that's the and scenario right now. Don is talking about changing

[22:22] it to an or. So, if you live in Alamosa County, we don't care if you own

[22:29] property within the city. We don't care if you work in the city. We don't care

[22:33] if you own a business in the city. If you live in Alamosa County, that's a

[22:37] close enough nexus that we feel you should qualify to be able to apply to a

[22:43] board. Or if you own you can live in any of the counties within the valley, but

[22:49] and but you have to own a business, property, or work full-time.

[22:55] Okay, I get it now. >> Well, that that's that's sounds pretty

[23:00] decent, but I'm gonna go to councelor Hensley.

[23:02] » So, personally, I feel like it's not broken. So, I'm not really gung-ho about

[23:08] changing it. That would be my first choice. If we went this route, I

[23:13] actually feel like even Alamosa County, any of them, if it's not in the city,

[23:18] they need to have they need to work have a place or something here, even if

[23:24] they're in the county. I just again, I just think there has to be something

[23:28] tied to the city. We are city um boards, things like that. So, there

[23:35] has to be a true tie to the city would be my second choice. So for me

[23:39] personally, even if it's just county residents, I still feel like they have

[23:42] to have the link to the city. >> So the only interest you really have

[23:47] from a second option is instead of it being limited to Alamosa County, you're

[23:53] open to it being for the valley, but you want to keep that nexus. You want to

[23:57] keep the three criteria. >> And I'm going to be honest, my first

[24:00] vote is probably going to be more just to keep it the way it is.

[24:03] » Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Well, we're having some healthy debate today. Good

[24:07] deal. Councelor Vio, >> I'm with Liz. Keep it the way it is.

[24:12] Don't mess with it. Leave it alone. Um, for the reasons Mr. Martinez brought up

[24:18] a really good point that I didn't even think about is if we put on someone from

[24:23] Swatch who wants to be on our library board when we had some folks from

[24:27] Alamosa who want to do it. Um, [clears throat]

[24:31] and then what Liz and Mike were saying about

[24:36] someone wanting to be on a board and trying to put their own agenda on there

[24:40] and that screwing everything up and keep it the way it is. Keep it the way.

[24:45] » Okay. Councelor Krebs and then councelor Carson,

[24:47] » can we take this opportunity then? Um, so I'm getting the gist of the board and

[24:52] I'm perfectly okay with that. Can we take a moment and discuss um the

[24:57] definition of full-time work? Because I think for for one of my boards, for

[25:02] example, a person who qualifies or or technically didn't qualify because they

[25:07] didn't have a full-time job. They're an artist. So, technically their their job

[25:12] is being a full-time artist, but everywhere.

[25:16] » Can can we pin that maybe for a different time kind of discussion

[25:21] » because I just wanted to make sure that that was touched on. Um, at least as if

[25:25] we say they work full-time. They do work full-time, but but and you could say

[25:30] that for plumbers, you could say that for house cleaners.

[25:33] » We disqualified someone for that. >> No, no,

[25:36] » no. But it it's it's it's a debate. It's a thing. And and it can we put something

[25:41] in there for for youth about being a full-time student so we don't

[25:45] accidentally exclude a youth under the current

[25:50] standards? Right now, a youth that lives in Alamosa

[25:54] County and goes to school within the Alamosa school district is eligible.

[25:59] » Okay. >> So, Okay. All right. Thank you.

[26:03] » We're going to go to Council Carson. Councelor Hensley, then I'll have a

[26:06] comment as well. Council Carson, >> I just want to let everyone up here know

[26:11] that I agree with all of you. [laughter] >> You guys are all

[26:16] » all the time. >> Thank you.

[26:18] » All right. Council say thank you councelor Carson.

[26:22] » I think I think you'd start muddying the water too if we start really getting

[26:25] into definition. I I think if I was have if you were going to pin me to a

[26:29] definition I would say that their their business address has to be in the city.

[26:34] You know like plumbers I'm married to an electrician. He definitely doesn't

[26:38] always work in Alamosa but his address or his business is Alamosa. I would just

[26:44] say we don't want to take we do are not recommending to take anything to the

[26:48] voters to try to do definition >> like that is way too that's beyond

[26:53] » I agree. >> Okay.

[26:54] » So so I'm I'm just going to say something. Um

[27:01] I know that there are a lot of people in Alamosa County. Let's say we didn't open

[27:04] it up to the valley and I can understand that. But if you I think there is a good

[27:08] reason to consider opening up to Alamosa County uh people whether they work here

[27:13] or not because there are people who live out in the county that might bring some

[27:18] value uh with some of their ideas and suggestions uh to our boards and

[27:22] advisory boards. They may not work here now, but maybe at one time they did work

[27:27] in the city or work at a university or uh just a thought, but it's going to

[27:32] boil down to um what what you all decide as a team. Um but I I don't see too much

[27:39] harm if we open it up to Alamos, the county residents um myself.

[27:46] So based on the com conversation, if I was going to summarize, I feel like I

[27:51] heard one, two, three, four, five people say, "It's not broken. Let's not fix it

[27:58] type of thing." And I'm hearing one person say, "I think we should talk

[28:02] about being more open, but it it seems the numbers are the other way." Am I am

[28:08] I misunderstanding anything? >> Okay.

[28:12] » I think I think you're absolutely right, Councelor Carson. Agree with you.

[28:16] We're going [laughter] with this. We're on a roll. Mayor, I don't know if we um

[28:20] want to close your discussion and do a little bit of time for any potential

[28:24] public comment um type of thing. >> Yes, we we can go ahead and and close it

[28:29] um for public comment. And I I want to thank council for the good healthy

[28:34] conversation and healthy uh debate. Um really appreciate that. Okay, so it

[28:39] looks like um we're going to leave things like they

[28:44] are.

[28:47] So, if we're opening it up to public comment, did you want to do that?

[28:51] » Yes. So, what I'm going to do right now only only if your comments are related

[28:55] to what we just talked about. If your comments are not related to what we just

[29:00] talked about, we will have a meeting that's starting at 7:00 and you'll be

[29:05] able to make your comments at our open city council meeting under the citizen

[29:10] comment section. Okay? And the comment cards are not don't I would not use the

[29:14] comment cards for this. I would just open it up like you normally do.

[29:17] » Okay. So, if anyone wants to make a comment about what we were just talking

[29:20] about, go over to the mic right there and you can start making your comments.

[29:24] And we do ask that you keep your comments to within 3 minutes. We do time

[29:29] those comments. If you're still talking at the 3minut mark, we will politely ask

[29:33] you to uh stop making your comments. Also, here on city council, uh we

[29:38] practice civility, meaning that we are mindful and respectful, not

[29:42] interrupting, cheering, or clapping when someone's making comments because we

[29:46] don't want them to lose the thoughts that they uh want to speak on. Okay? So,

[29:51] if you have any comments, just please go up to the mic and you can start making

[29:55] your comments.

[29:59] Go ahead. You go right there.

[30:10] Um, my name is Rebecca. I currently moved to Alamosa about two years ago.

[30:15] Um, if I start crying or anything, don't mind that. That's my anxiety. People

[30:20] people really bother me. Um, the conversation I just came into, it sounds

[30:25] like a really great idea. Um, a lot of people that I've actually met come from

[30:31] the San Louise area and stuff and they come here for the help. So, that really

[30:36] says something if it says anything. Um, it sounds like you guys are trying

[30:42] to do a great job and really appreciate you guys. Thanks for letting me speak

[30:46] the first time. >> Thank you. Thank you.

[30:51] » Okay. Anyone else any comments regarding uh what we just talked about? If not, I

[30:57] don't see any. Uh, let's go to Zoom and we'll go to the Zoom participant.

[31:03] We'll go to Zoom. If you're on Zoom and you have any comments you would like to

[31:06] make, use the raise your hand feature at the bottom of the screen and raise your

[31:09] hand and we'll recognize you. I don't see any hands raised. I don't

[31:14] see anybody on Zoom. All right. So, we're going to go ahead and close this

[31:17] segment and uh give council a little bit of time back and we'll come back at 7

[31:21] o'clock. We're good.

Work Session - 3/4/2026 - Expansion of Advisory Board Residency Qualifications to SLV Discussion

Transcript