[0:00] City council, regular meeting for February 11, 2025. That's a call to order. Could we have a roll call for attendance, please? Councillor Doyle. Councillor Gooth. Here. Councillor Howenstein. Councillor Rose. Here. Mayor Tory. Here as well. Ward will not be able to join us this evening. He is still feeling under the weather. No scheduled public appearances this evening. That brings us to citizens comments and petitions. This is an opportunity for citizens to address council on items not

[0:30] That's scheduled for a public hearing.

[0:32] We do ask that you limit your comments to about three minutes so that everybody has a fair and equal opportunity to speak.

[0:38] Any members of the public here at the Dress Council, I see a hand up right back there.

[0:42] It looks like Neil, come on up.

[0:44] Thank you, Mayor.

[0:46] Thank you, thank you.

[0:49] Neil Siegel, I ask for it.

[0:51] Mayor Tory, with your permission, I'd like to direct my comments to Jim Trude and I.

[0:57] Jim Trude's permission you can address your comments.

[1:00] Jim, it's 17 years of public service and from this side of the table, the public side of the table, I just want to say thank you, really say thank you.

[1:15] You've been a fierce advocate for the city for all these years, a trusted advisor to various members of council, and a teacher, most uniquely a teacher.

[1:27] Over the years, you have had and demonstrated the ability to take really complex subjects

[1:35] and boil them down to their essence to make them understandable.

[1:40] You know, the Japanese have a word for it.

[1:42] It's called Sen-Sai, means master, not just teacher, but master teacher.

[1:47] And you are one.

[1:49] You know, together we've worked a long time on various things, charter amendments, filling

[1:54] city council vacancies, term limits, sorry mayor, sorry ward, but we were responsible for that.

[2:03] Remember a rank choice voting in one year out the other, that was their doing too.

[2:08] Most importantly though, I remember you giving me a lesson in a land use issue that

[2:14] caused us to go back to the original plotting of the city and trying to figure out

[2:19] You know, we're a pocket park existed by trying to find and locate a boulder in the middle

[2:24] of Castle Creek, you know, that was on the original plots of the city.

[2:28] So again, teaching, teaching, I got to confess, I still disagree with you on the meeting of

[2:36] the word emergency and the charter, but we can take that for another day.

[2:42] But just in closing, I just want to thank you for a remarkable body of work.

[2:46] You know, there are a few people in this community that come and go in a real difference

[2:53] makers.

[2:53] People retire, people leave, people come.

[2:56] But there are very few people in this community whose career has made a difference, a real

[3:03] difference to this city.

[3:05] And that's where you fit in.

[3:07] You've been a real difference maker, and I thank you for that.

[3:11] Thank you.

[3:11] Thanks, Neil.

[3:13] I'm so honored.

[3:18] Yeah.

[3:20] other members of the public for public comment this evening.

[3:33] One

[3:37] more call for public comment tonight.

[3:47] If not, I'll bring it back to council member comments this evening.

[3:55] Sam, you want to start?

[3:56] Yeah, it feels like a shameless plug but I just want to start by saying thank you to the special events team and everyone that worked the art cart rally the other night.

[4:11] Yeah, very thankful for it, went better than expected, but honestly, it was an amazing

[4:16] event.

[4:17] West you sent an email to all the participants earlier today, and there was like five

[4:21] respondents, mostly parents of kids, talking about how excited their children were of like

[4:25] being there and how they're planning for next year, and I have nothing up my sleeve yet,

[4:29] but I'll be thinking, but it was a really good time, and I wanted to just get major kudos

[4:33] to those who helped put it on.

[4:36] The other thing I wanted to bring up tonight was I had to exchange the emails back and forth

[4:41] with Sarah, say, manager about the referendums on the ballot this March.

[4:47] And I just, as a huge advocate for a new EIS, a modern day solution for the problem to

[4:52] the entrance to Aspen.

[4:53] and I just wanted to ask this council to write.

[5:00] I have a letter to see asking about the implications of referendum two as it refers to a new EIS to make sure that if referendum two does pass, it says use of the open space, but it is not a straight endorsement of the preferred alternative. And as someone that has come around to being okay of using the open space for the right solution, a new EIS is what's needed for that right solution. And I think it's very important for the citizens of Aspen to know.

[5:29] that if you vote yes on REF 2, if it allows for a new EIS or not, and I don't know what

[5:36] the answer is going to be from CIDOT, and they're not supposed to weigh in politically.

[5:40] It's just an implication question for more information for people to make an educated

[5:44] decision on specifically REF 2.

[5:47] So that is what I'd like to ask the rest of Council to support a letter asking that question

[5:52] to CIDOT.

[5:53] What are the implications of REF 2 as it relates to going for a new EIS and having that

[5:59] approved to be able to be done.

[6:02] I would include Referendum 1, I mean if there's, and I don't see how, I don't know.

[6:09] Like you said, I don't know if either does or doesn't, but I would include both referendums for question.

[6:16] That's fine.

[6:17] And Board had asked me that, and I just, Ref1 has less to do with the EIS, so, but it's okay, including that as well.

[6:27] So I would support that I also I'll support it both are included

[6:33] Do you need more clarity on that? I know they might not respond immediately. They might say it's

[6:39] political I'm just looking for an implication question

[6:42] I know it has to go through steps of the attorney general that that's the way in on it

[6:47] So I know it's not an easy question to ask, but I think in my heart it needs to be asked at least

[6:54] Sure, we'll draft a letter and add it on to your work session, I guess, we have a meeting

[7:00] next week.

[7:01] We will all want Council's review of the letter prior to it being sent to ensure it

[7:05] meets your intent, so we will take a look at the schedule to see what it takes to make

[7:09] that happen.

[7:10] Thank you.

[7:12] Given the tight time for him, perhaps there's some way to do that via email.

[7:16] Yeah, because there's no meetings next week.

[7:24] You make a decision through email process if it's just a review and there's no decision

[7:33] making required for it and you're directing staff here to go ahead and send the letter.

[7:39] I'm as not thrown in running by council just to review but you have to be delegating to

[7:46] the staff to send the letter here.

[7:49] It's not that complicated question, it's just what are the implications?

[7:54] It's doable.

[7:56] Yeah.

[7:56] Okay.

[7:57] We'll look at it and talk about it.

[8:00] Thanks.

[8:00] Thank you.

[8:01] That's all from me.

[8:01] Thank you.

[8:03] John?

[8:04] Yeah.

[8:05] Just wanted to, as we enter the new year, NOAA has stated that 2024 was the warmest year in modern record for the globe.

[8:15] records have been being kept since 1850 so that's 105 years record keeping.

[8:21] The second warmest year was 2023 and the 10 warmest years since 1850 have all occurred

[8:29] in the last 10 years.

[8:33] This is really again why I ran for office to try and mitigate the changes that are going

[8:42] We're going to come to our community and how they're going to affect our resort dynamics or economy.

[8:51] Anyway, welcome to the coldest winter of the rest of our lives.

[8:55] Thanks.

[8:57] Thank you.

[8:59] Bill.

[9:00] Thank you.

[9:01] A couple of things.

[9:02] Number one, touching on this conversation on referendum one and referendum two.

[9:07] I really encourage everyone in the public to understand what this vote is and

[9:12] what it isn't. Unfortunately, it's a perverse proxy for the preferred alternative, similar

[9:19] to the way that the airport vote was structured. There's a lot of similarities here.

[9:27] But I don't think, I understand the community's frustration. I share the frustration in getting

[9:34] something done. It's been far too long. We need a new entrance to ask in configuration.

[9:41] We also need a lot of other work towards traffic flow improvement, some of which we discussed moving forward last night in our joint work session with Picking County commissioners.

[9:53] But I fear that a lot of people in our community don't understand that approving referendum to.

[10:00] Seeds a lot of the control that we have as a community to CDOT and may prevent us from pursuing a new EIS. That's what Sam just proposed. We tried to get some clarity from CDOT on. But I fear that the process that we've said in motion to come up with a new solution for the entrance to Aspen that does meet Aspen's needs of today would be sidelined.

[10:28] or eroded in a major way if referendum two is approved.

[10:33] So regardless of whether or not you like the preferred alternative, I do think it can be improved upon.

[10:39] I do think that it's a flawed approach.

[10:41] I do think that we've set the wheels in motion to come up with the right approach for today's Aspen and

[10:48] tomorrow's Aspen, and I encourage you to vote no on referendum two.

[10:53] I do like referendum one and support that, but I will leave that up to the discretion of each individual.

[11:00] But I do really urge caution on referendum two and strongly advocate against it.

[11:11] Secondly, as I mentioned in the last meeting, we do have an election coming up March 4th. I encourage everyone to get educated.

[11:20] There are, the mayor position is up for reelection, it was up for election, I'm sorry, and two council seats are up for election.

[11:27] I'm proud to endorse and support Katie Frisch for mayor and Emily Colby and Christine Benadetti for council positions.

[11:34] I encourage everyone in the community to do your research, ask questions, understand who supports your positions, and

[11:42] and might effectuate the change that you're looking for.

[11:46] And then lastly, we talked about, at the last meeting,

[11:51] I talked about some alley upgrades,

[11:56] and we discussed revisiting it again at this meeting.

[11:59] So I wanted to pose to my fellow council members,

[12:02] whether they've had an opportunity to digest the memo about alleys,

[12:06] the staff put together and whether we can provide some direction to staff

[12:10] on that for further action.

[12:15] Any comments?

[12:18] Yeah, the same comments as last time,

[12:20] because I did read them the last time,

[12:22] and it's just that there is a triage of alley ways

[12:25] that just need more work than others,

[12:27] and I know there's a price tag to them,

[12:29] but that's what local governments all about

[12:32] is fixing the problems right in front of your eyes.

[12:35] So if your alley is filled with just holes,

[12:37] the city should do something about it,

[12:39] and we have the money for it, so.

[12:43] And so the information, only memo that we got outlined a plan that attacks two alleys,

[12:49] I believe, and has a three-year plan, is that kind of the gist of it?

[12:54] I think there was a loose suggestion that that could happen, but no direction has come

[12:59] from this table to staff to take that specific plan of action or a different plan of action.

[13:05] I would propose that we identify sort of the most critical alleys, whether that's two,

[13:10] three, four or five, I don't know, but I don't think that we need to do this equitable

[13:17] arrangement that was sort of hinted at in the memo.

[13:20] I think that we need to, as Sam, I think eloquently, put it triage those that are the worst

[13:26] and do something about them, and help out our community.

[13:30] And are you talking about paving, are you talking about grading and graveling, are you talking

[13:36] about just the residentials?

[13:39] I don't know, I would suggest our engineering team or a engineering consultant evaluate those that are determined to be the most problematic and determine what the appropriate resolutions are.

[13:51] I don't know if there's all sorts of things that might need to be done or combinations of them. I don't want to weigh in on those, but I'd like staff to come back to us with what is necessary to address these most problematic alleyways.

[14:09] I'm pulling it back up. Yes, I've been through this memo three times now, but what you're saying doesn't seem to veer too much from this except for start time, are you are you asking for two alleys to be identified and prioritized for this spring?

[14:25] Well, number one, I'm asking for clear direction from this table.

[14:30] That's what I'm asking, that's most important.

[14:33] Number two, I know that there are two alleyways that we have heard about.

[14:39] You know, Cecil has mentioned one and the other one is between Maine and Hopkins and 6th and 7th, right?

[14:48] Those are the two that I'm aware of.

[14:50] There may be others that where people haven't spoken up that the engineering department or

[14:54] The street department has top of mind that are just as bad.

[14:58] I don't know, I want to give them an opportunity.

[15:00] We need to sort of prioritize those if they exist. So, I don't want to set a hard cap at two, but I want to say those that are extremely problematic, I'd like to create an immediate plan for and start working towards a budget for it.

[15:16] Yes, I support that. I do not support paving alleys in residential area at this time, but I support staff coming to us with some sort of plan to attack problem areas sooner than later. Thanks.

[15:34] John?

[15:35] I support that as well, Bill.

[15:37] Thank you.

[15:38] That's it for my comments.

[15:39] Thanks very much.

[15:40] Thank you.

[15:43] Let's see here.

[15:45] I've got a couple.

[15:47] First, I just want to wish Ward well.

[15:49] He's not really bad off,

[15:51] but I just want to wish him well.

[15:52] He's been down and out with some kind of a headache

[15:55] and sinus or something, but it's been three days.

[15:57] So first, I want to just wish him well.

[15:59] Next, shout-outs for the art cart Derby.

[16:02] want to say thank you to special events. I think everybody that was out there would encourage

[16:06] everybody that missed it to attend it next year. It is a great community gathering, a good time

[16:12] to get out and just have a great time, a very family-friendly event, which we need more and more.

[16:18] Definitely supports Asman's unique character, or at least the character that Asman was known for.

[16:24] I want to just list a couple of the winners because most creative kids' cart was The Little Drama by

[16:30] Sydney Farrell, fastest kids' cart, the goofy goobers, Cole Ryan, and Wyatt DeVito.

[16:35] Most creative adult cart is Super Venison by Chase Ellsperman, and the fastest adult

[16:42] cart was the groundhog, Sam Rose.

[16:49] And again, congratulations to the winners, but congratulations to those that participated

[16:53] were there watching and putting on the event.

[16:55] Thank you to special event staff.

[16:58] Bike to work day.

[16:59] Yes, winter bike to work day is Friday, February 14th on Valentine's Day.

[17:04] This community event is designed to encourage cycling and walking as alternative modes of transportation during the winter season.

[17:11] So after biking, walking, or taking the bus, stopped by Peppie Park, 730 to 930 this Friday.

[17:18] Enjoy free food and drinks, learn about commuter safety, and have a chance to win prizes.

[17:24] And it says any cyclers who wear their helmets will receive a free gift.

[17:28] But anybody who's bringing or wearing their helmet should get a free gift so even if you're riding the bus wearing your helmet come by for a free gift

[17:38] Ballots in the mail. That's right. It is the election season as it has been stated

[17:43] Residents are able to vote by mail in person or by dropping off their ballot the drop box for city municipal elections is actually here in front of City Hall down on Rio Grande

[17:53] way, Rio Grande Place, there is, our box is not the one in front of the Picking County

[17:58] House, so that will be locked. Please drop your ballots at City Hall at 427 Rio Grande

[18:02] Place. They must be received by Election Day, by 7 p.m. Election Day. I'll give you a

[18:09] little bit more information. In-person voting at City Hall is scheduled to be available

[18:14] February 18th to March 3rd, right? It cuts off just before Election Day. Eight to five

[18:21] on a daily basis Monday through Friday. On election day, in-person voting is open seven to seven,

[18:28] and all persons must bring a valid government issued ID. You can still register to vote. A lot of

[18:34] people don't know that we still register people up to 22 days ahead of an election, so we're getting

[18:40] close. You do need to be able to provide some residency proof, but you can either go to the

[18:52] If you don't receive your ballot, I'm sorry, by February 24th, you should contact the city clerk's office on the third floor of City Hall or call 429-2686.

[19:04] Again, if you haven't received it by February 24th, it is somewhere that it's not supposed to be.

[19:10] If you're going to be out of town, you can request an absentee about online at aspen.gov on the city clerk's office page.

[19:19] Please visit that for any more information. Is there any information that I missed? Do you care to add something?

[19:25] Yeah, people can register up to the day of election day over at the county.

[19:30] Oh, I'm sorry. You just need to provide proof of residency that shows that you were here 22 days or something like that.

[19:38] So up to election day, on election day, including if you have that proof.

[19:43] A couple more announcements, help shape Apsha's future, there are community forums coming up.

[19:48] Community members are asked to join Apsha's staff in the police department community room on the second floor.

[19:54] February 18th, from 4 to 6 p.m., or February 9th.

[20:00] 16th, 6 to 8 p.m., this is just great to provide feedback that helps guide the agency's five-year strategic plan. Real quickly, you know, we hear a lot of complaints all the time about actually even. If you don't show up, if you have complaints and you don't show up to this, then you don't have the right to complain anymore. Show up and give your input, please.

[20:27] Let's see, that'll do it for these announcements.

[20:29] What else did I have tonight?

[20:33] Let's see.

[20:34] This talk about referendum one versus referendum two.

[20:38] I think maybe some people are sharing personal perspective and their personal choices on these things.

[20:46] I think referendum one is the similar to referendum two in that it is a singular interest group that is trying to utilize the voting system

[20:58] and a referendum for their own gains, since we were sharing how we feel about these, my

[21:05] advice is vote no on both.

[21:08] I wanted to talk to this council about a couple items.

[21:12] The first one, this Thursday at 5.30 at the Aspen Chapel, there is a talk going on by J.W.

[21:21] of Fryberg and it is understanding loneliness and it's a very interesting approach to talking

[21:28] about mental health issues that we all deal with but this is understanding loneliness in the

[21:35] 21st century. And what I wanted to ask council about is if you would support this event with me

[21:42] to the tune of 250 bucks. It's $25 tickets, again it's at the Aspen Chapel this Thursday at 530.

[21:49] It's $25 tickets, and one council could sponsor the event to $250, but also we could make those 10 tickets available to people that may not either afford them or want to afford them.

[22:03] And I was just wondering if council would support this event to the tune of $250.

[22:07] I think the appropriate funds would maybe be council contingency, monies?

[22:13] Yeah. Sure. Support. I would say with the recent suicides I've heard about. Yes, this would be money well spent.

[22:24] Yeah. Is that okay? Great.

[22:29] Then we all received an email that was regarding neon signs.

[22:38] And I don't know if, did you, did any of you guys get a chance to look at the sign regulations around this by any chance?

[22:48] I'm generally familiar with emails with Ben.

[22:51] Okay. Just wondering if anybody wants to talk about this further.

[22:58] Neon and neon appearing signs. There is a prohibition of them as long for direct lighting.

[23:05] I guess you'd say, if they are covered or facing in backwards, perhaps, I'm just wondering.

[23:12] We got an email from Della who has the neon cowboy on Main Street.

[23:18] And I'm just wondering, do council members care to consider the codes, consider amendments to the codes or the like?

[23:29] I'm

[23:36] happy to discuss it and hear Comdev's opinion on it.

[23:39] I'm definitely opposed to Neon signage.

[23:43] What you're asking about is, I think what your interest is,

[23:48] and please correct me if I'm wrong, is allowing for some art

[23:51] that contains Neon.

[23:52] I understand there's a delicate balance there.

[23:55] It has super tricky to navigate.

[23:59] So I'm happy to sort of hear Ben's opinion real time

[24:02] or at a later date on that, but it seems tricky and as much as I want to help out Della,

[24:15] I'm definitely opposed to neon signage. So that's where I'm sort of stuck there.

[24:22] Appreciate that.

[24:24] Yeah, my answer is, it feels like a non-answer because in talking to Ben, it seemed just so complicated.

[24:29] I actually felt like the most unfortunate thing about the situation is that it's complaint

[24:36] based, so then someone gets told on and then they go around seeing all these other neon signs

[24:41] and they're like what the heck.

[24:44] So I'm sure there's improvements to be had, I just don't know what they are, but I'd entertain

[24:49] Ben presenting those if it wasn't going to be torture for him or anyone else to see if there

[24:54] was something we could find that was nuanced and right for everyone.

[24:57] Great.

[24:59] John.

[25:00] And then to add to the confusion, a lot of the new LED lighting and signing looks like neon and that adds complexity to the situation. Thank you guys very much. You know, I don't know that we're not really calling for a work session, I guess. This is, to me, this is a really small issue. Complexes, it may be, it is a small issue.

[25:24] You know, and I, I agree, I agree that this

[25:29] the community does want to see some regulation around this.

[25:33] I think it really comes out of decades ago

[25:35] when there was a proliferation of neon

[25:38] and that was kind of popping up more and more places.

[25:44] But, you know, yeah, I would love to at least get some information,

[25:48] have the conversation started.

[25:50] You know, the, what was I thinking of today?

[25:54] I was like, you know, this feels like the movie foot loose,

[25:57] but with neon science, you know?

[25:59] Now, this town, we're almost sterilizing this town so much that it's just, it's losing

[26:08] some character, losing some flavor, losing some vibrancy, I think everybody would agree

[26:12] with that.

[26:14] And so, yeah, I appreciate the support, Ben, I don't know what direction to give, but I

[26:19] think this deserves some kind of update on our lighting code.

[26:24] So you just did a large update to the lighting code three years ago, not even that one year ago.

[26:31] Okay, so this council went through that entire update, including this discussion then.

[26:35] Unfortunately, it does require a policy resolution if you want to see any changes.

[26:39] And then I'll defer to the attorney's office regarding your inability or

[26:43] inability to regulate what is assigned and what is art.

[26:46] That is also a matter of Supreme Court justice, Supreme Court, sorry, rulings.

[26:53] So I do think it's not quite as simple as we might hope for a conversation and I would

[26:58] suggest that a work session is actually necessary to understand the scope of a policy resolution.

[27:04] I don't believe right now we have quite enough direction to draft that.

[27:07] There are also other issues related to signs rather than lighting.

[27:10] So, that are also the subject of some federal rulings that our sign code does not follow at this point.

[27:21] That we would suggest that perhaps these need to be looked in tandem because they are interrelated.

[27:27] Thank you.

[27:28] There's a couple more issues then, support for the work session at some point.

[27:33] Yes, support for the, yeah, great, hopefully it's a small one, but thank you.

[27:37] Thanks, Sarah.

[27:41] We talked about our alleyways and all right, those are my comments this evening and it'll bring us to agenda amendments.

[27:50] I didn't see any this evening and city managers comments tonight.

[27:58] If you wish to attend the Acro breakfast on Wednesday February 19th, can you please send me an email by close a business tomorrow so your ticket can be purchased.

[28:07] Thank you.

[28:14] Any board reports for this evening?

[28:17] Yes.

[28:17] That's, um, do you want to talk about cast or should I go right ahead, roll with a couple?

[28:24] Okay, uh, Ward and Torian, I attended a Colorado Association of Skeet Townsmanian Breckenridge

[28:30] January 30th and 31st, um, for the housing and Breckenridge seminar, there, let's see,

[28:42] I'm

[28:42] just going to summarize this part by saying, um, a lot of these, these, uh, seminars about

[28:49] housing. I wrote, again, very apparent that APSHA is years ahead of other

[28:53] communities. Home owners association and are focused on thriving, not just

[29:00] surviving. Let's see, there was Geothermal was talked about quite a bit. It turns

[29:06] out, Vale has 12 acres of snow melt and they heat that in their downtown core

[29:12] with gas boilers. So they are looking at Geothermal and staining it very carefully

[29:17] to save money and energy.

[29:22] Let's see, yeah, their boilers are 440 kilowatts,

[29:26] which is a very large boiler.

[29:30] Also was talked about was thermal energy networks.

[29:33] Those are shortened to the acronym 10s.

[29:36] Colorado Mesa University has one.

[29:38] It heats their whole campus geothermal.

[29:41] It's a little bit different than heat pumps and so on.

[29:46] and their systems have a lifespan of a hundred years, so the state's looking at code changes

[29:53] to encourage TEMs in large new developments, and that's all I've got for cast.

[30:00] Also attended an action meeting with Ward recently. So I'll take that since Ward's not here.

[30:08] We talked about, or talked, talked about home repair systems. We had some public comment about insurance rents going up. 10% and 20% and then they got dropped. So we are, that's a very serious issue we're going to be looking at. Not just fire insurance, but

[30:30] which homeowner's insurance for all of our HOAs.

[30:37] Strategic plan is going to be developed over the next five years.

[30:41] As Torrey mentioned, we are having the open house for Apsha comments and that's it for

[30:51] Apsha.

[30:52] Please do attend those Apsha open houses we need as much information as we can get.

[30:58] Can I share a story about a cast?

[31:01] Yes.

[31:01] Oh yeah that would be fine. So Cass is the Colorado Association of Skeetowns and this was the

[31:09] largest gathering that Cass has ever seen of about 106 participants from not just Colorado

[31:18] Skeetowns but Canada, Utah, Wyoming are also members and such. It's a great opportunity to get

[31:30] together and talk about the challenges that confront all of our communities and what

[31:34] we're doing to overcome them. Along with the list that John just talked about, those

[31:40] were some of the official presentations, but child care, providing child care was talked

[31:46] about in relationship to housing and the like and just the challenges of livability in the

[31:52] mountains. However, I just want to share a quick story with the Aspen community and bring

[31:57] a little levity to some of these meetings and this one in particular. So we were over in

[32:01] Breckenridge and John and I were heading in town to get a beer or something and John mentioned

[32:08] that his father, also John Doyle, back in the day with a gentleman named Adolf Kors founded a ski club

[32:19] and originally out of Denver, but founded in Georgetown where John grew up.

[32:29] And that the original clubhouse or whatever you would call it,

[32:36] in Georgetown the highway was built right where the clubhouse was,

[32:40] so they had to move it, and they thought to themselves,

[32:42] well let's get it up in the hills where the skiing is, let's go to Breckenridge.

[32:45] which it's called the Shush Bombers.

[32:47] Am I even allowed to mention this in public?

[32:49] It's a very secret kind of thing.

[32:53] Anyway, we went over to the Shush Bombers Chalet.

[32:57] This was an amazing experience.

[32:58] I could go on about some of the details,

[33:00] but the one that I wanted to share was that we walk in

[33:02] and I found a plaque up on the wall

[33:05] that was with John Doyle.

[33:08] His father's name on it as the founding president in 1952.

[33:14] We then, of course, as soon as the other Schuss bombers realized who John was, we were royalty in the room immediately and it was just so fantastic.

[33:25] We hung out for about an hour and a half, just talking with the guys and talking about skiing and the light.

[33:30] What was very interesting about it was that every single person there revered Aspen and has Aspen story.

[33:39] So we were in the Schuss bomber chalet over in Breckneridge, but every one of them had

[33:44] just such great things to say about Aspen, especially the skiing in Aspen, Colorado.

[33:49] But it was just a really neat time, a really neat moment.

[33:51] I enjoyed sharing some of your family history with you, so thanks.

[33:55] You're welcome. I do want to add one thing, though.

[34:00] Yeah, the reason the club had to be moved was because I70 was going through Georgetown,

[34:05] and it had to go somewhere else.

[34:07] When it was founded back in 1952 with eight of course the third my dad and a couple other guys

[34:14] They wanted to get people up in the mountains and they formed the Shuse Bamersky Club to get single people up in the mountains to have a great time

[34:21] And come back and get their friends and it became wildly popular. It was built in a former whorehouse and

[34:30] I think a lot of Georgetown residents were thankful that it went away

[34:34] But as it turns out, it is still only open to singles, and it's mostly older people, as it turns out, and they're housed on separate floors, male floor, female floor.

[34:46] And it's so true to the original intent, the gentleman that was giving us a tour showed us his bedroom, and it was a room with two bunk beds in it.

[34:56] Every room had double bunk beds in it.

[35:00] Every room was four person occupancy, singles only, no couples staying. It was a very interesting experience. Anyway, thanks again, John. Thank you. With that, brings us to our consent calendar tonight. Resolution number 10 is the Smuggler Mountain Open Space Management Plan. Resolution number 13, theater aspen letter of intent. Resolution number 14 and 15, red brick to puppy Smith electric circuit replacement. Resolution number 16, construction manager.

[35:29] at risk water treatment facilities improvement project resolution number 18

[35:35] approval of contract with economic and planning systems to conduct a

[35:38] regional housing needs assessment resolution number 19 armory hall adaptive

[35:43] reuse resolution number 20 confirmation of city council direction on armory

[35:48] hall land use application resolution number 23 amendment to city of 20 James

[35:54] These are our true contract and the draft minutes of January 28th, 2025.

[35:59] I will start by pulling a couple of items.

[36:02] I want to pull resolution number 13.

[36:05] I would like to pull the items with the armory, so that's 19 and 20, those are me.

[36:13] Any other items for discussion?

[36:16] 18, please.

[36:17] 18, got it.

[36:19] Any others?

[36:21] Yeah, there's not many left.

[36:22] All right,

[36:30] feeder Aspen, letter of intent.

[36:47] Thanks for joining us.

[36:48] It's just real quickly, I have concerns about this project.

[36:52] I read the memo, I see where parks and open space have discussed it.

[36:58] But they felt that some of the changes responded to their inquiries, but

[37:03] they did not take an official yes or no support and

[37:06] on support vote, you know, to be very clear about how I feel as a citizen.

[37:12] I feel like I'd be happy if theatre aspen were to construct a more solid and functional

[37:20] building for themselves down there.

[37:22] But I have some concern about the excavation going down for another floor of rehearsal space

[37:29] and the like.

[37:30] And I also have the concern that this is park and open space, and typically a park and open space needs a vote for usage or sale, I should say, but this is the least opportunity, a long term lease.

[37:49] And so I still feel like the public should be able to weigh on on this as this is their park and open space.

[37:55] case. Number one, I just need to make those comments known. But number two, I just wanted

[38:01] to get some input here, is does this imply City Council's support for the iterations

[38:11] that we've seen at this point?

[38:14] Great, thanks. My name is Matt Coon. I'm the Parks and Open Space Director. I'm joined

[38:19] with Mike Tente, our landscape and construction manager. I just also want to point out in

[38:25] In the room we have Bart Johnson and Charles Cuniff who are representing Theeter Aspen in person.

[38:30] Jed Bernstein is also available virtually.

[38:36] Mike, do you want to take that question?

[38:38] Yeah, Mayor council, I believe the question was if this binds us to the sketch that has been developed currently.

[38:46] Is that correct?

[38:47] So sort of does it imply council support and does that in turn in some way jump ahead of a land use process?

[38:57] So the letter of intent identifies a framework and that framework would help guide a land use application process.

[39:06] So this is really looking for council support to begin that process.

[39:12] That is the typical land use process that the city requires of all projects.

[39:17] It's very thorough, very robust, and there is ample space built into that project for

[39:26] council to have feedback, direct feedback.

[39:30] And even in the letter of intent, it is recognized that there is the possibility that this would go to the public.

[39:36] So it does not necessarily bind us to any specifics.

[39:43] It's really a framework that indicates that we would work in good faith with theater aspen towards the goal of this land use application.

[39:53] And for it to go to a vote of the public, it would either do that by a public referendum or city council.

[40:00] Council direction.

[40:03] Yeah, I would let Jim. Here's a couple of ways that could happen. Might try to, there are a couple of ways that could happen. Council could direct the ordinance to, to the vote of the voters or to approval of the voters. It also will likely have provisions that could be referred through a petition by citizens.

[40:32] but certainly Council on its own could place the approval of the ordinance on the ballot, similar to what happened to the lift one.

[40:42] So it would need to be initiated by someone, somebody, some organization, there is no automatic trigger for it.

[40:52] No, no, it could be initiated by Council.

[40:55] Correct.

[40:55] Council can put it, or if Council elect chooses not to refer the ordinance to the vote,

[41:02] there are items that would be, would make it subject to a referendum, which would be

[41:10] the petition of the people.

[41:14] Right. So once again, it would have to be initiated by either this body or another body,

[41:19] or the general public, basically a referendum, but there are no intrinsic triggers in this

[41:24] that would most likely be us.

[41:27] Okay.

[41:30] Anybody else have any questions?

[41:32] I had similar comments and questions to you, Tori.

[41:35] And I just wanted to say my support for this is for there to be a vote on this.

[41:40] It is way too impactful for the Council to decide on its own for such a beautiful spot in town.

[41:47] And I really more actually want to say that direct to a theatre aspect that if you're going to go through with this

[41:52] I just understand that you're going to have to get public support, so whatever you do, do it with that in mind.

[41:59] Thank you.

[42:02] Thank you, yes, appreciate it.

[42:04] Thanks, thank you.

[42:08] The next item was number 18.

[42:10] This is approval of contract with economic and planning systems, the regional housing assessment.

[42:30] Thanks, guys, a few questions here.

[42:32] One, I noticed that this is proposed to cover Aspen picking county to Garfield County.

[42:40] Can you help me understand why that area?

[42:44] Yeah, of course.

[42:45] So we've had a few discussions with Dolla about this project specifically because one of the first goals of this is to apply for a proposition 123 waiver and they did recommend conducting it regionally and even they thought going to Glenwood or Garfield would make it a stronger study.

[43:04] Okay. Can we zoom out a little bit? Can you explain to me what is a proposition one, two, three waiver, and why would we want one?

[43:10] Yeah, of course. So, for it to be eligible for Proposition 123 funding, and they have a few different buckets.

[43:19] And all of the funding buckets are restricted by different AMIs and to have more flexibility and serve higher AMIs, which Aspen really needs.

[43:27] These all rural resort communities have to submit a waiver to be able to be eligible for that flexibility in funding.

[43:35] And how much potential funding is on the table for us?

[43:40] Realistically, not what's the total pool of funding, but what are we, what could we realistically expect to obtain as a result of this?

[43:47] I think the plan is to, and Sarah may be able to provide additional input on this.

[43:51] I know she can, likely we will be requesting millions for the lumber yard and that's this very specific focus on this.

[44:04] Would broadening the area of study to include Garfield County not decrease the average AMI?

[44:14] So one of the pieces in this is the reason, another reason why we're looking at that full scope and the Department of Local Affairs has very much recommended this and this mirrors housing needs assessment, which was recently done by Eagle County is because that's where our workforce lives, and if our workforce lives there, we have to be talking about the entire region.

[44:36] Now, to get into kind of a level of detail that may be a little bit painful, the scope

[44:43] of what the funding partners get and the scope of what we're going to data we'll be producing

[44:49] for Garfield County is a little bit different.

[44:53] But it's too our own benefit and there may be some data that Garfield County

[45:00] The committee says, oh, that's interesting, but they're not going to get the level of information that we need to submit those waivers. And is Glenwood Springs conducting this study, too, to the best of your knowledge? They are, they are not participating in our study. They are aware of this, and they're just not at that point where they're ready to do that. Because they don't want to participate with us, or because they are

[45:29] unsure whether they're going to conduct this and ask for a waiver.

[45:33] So one of the things is that when you complete this assessment, it requires a three-year

[45:41] update if you wish to continue to pursue Proposition 1-2-3 funding.

[45:46] And so some jurisdictions need to evaluate whether they can actually execute something within

[45:50] that three-year time period, and it may be advantageous for them to delay this step because

[45:56] perhaps they're looking at a five-year timeline as an example. And therefore, we felt this was

[46:03] critical the way that the Proposition 12 money is split between the Department of Local Affairs

[46:08] and the Office of Economic Development and International Trade for the State are both

[46:14] pools of money that we have an interest in and supporting the community's objectives. So taking

[46:20] Seeing this step is fundamental, the failure to do this step will remove Aspen's ability to even apply for those dollars.

[46:29] Understood, thanks.

[46:30] And you're asking for $200,000 here, is that our proportionate share, or is $200,000 in the total and we're splitting it equally amongst Aspen Picking County in Snowmass?

[46:46] Yes.

[46:46] Yes, that's the total amount for the contract and we'll split that with snowmouse and pick in county.

[46:52] Equally?

[46:53] Equally.

[46:54] Great, thanks.

[46:57] And just for clarity, that's common because we're the fiscal agent for the project.

[47:01] So we have to have the expenditure authority for the entire contract to comply with law.

[47:06] And we do view it as a screaming deal because we would have to do the study on our own if we didn't have the partners.

[47:12] Great, thanks for the answers.

[47:14] We love screaming deals.

[47:16] More screaming deals.

[47:19] Just one question.

[47:21] In phase one, current and projected needs.

[47:25] And I bring this up just because growth is so sensitive in this community.

[47:29] And I don't like unintended consequences from this.

[47:32] How are they going to, if you know, project needs for this community?

[47:41] They're probably going to be using a mix of different data that they're collecting,

[47:44] looking at job growth over time, different developments in the pipeline, commuter patterns.

[47:53] I think what's key is that it's actually very prescriptive of what data you may or may

[47:58] not use in this housing needs assessment.

[48:02] And there's very explicit direction on behalf of our community that participated in providing

[48:09] commentary on that, trying to offer more local flexibility than what the state was really

[48:14] looking at offering.

[48:15] So a lot will be determined by the state demographer's office data, by census data, and they will allow us to look at some things, particularly the origin and destination of workforce.

[48:30] But those are sort of drivers, key drivers, and what the state believes is acceptable data for determining those things.

[48:38] is that so what that means is what the study may show may not aligned to the Aspen area

[48:45] community plan and quite frankly that's okay because you control the land use at this table.

[48:50] Yeah, that's what I was going to say that I feel like the Senate of Colorado is really obsessed

[48:58] with growth and density while this community is not necessarily obsessed with wanting to grow

[49:03] or maybe a little more density, but it's very sensitive here, so I don't want to be beholden

[49:09] to wrong things. And then I don't know if you can add this to the scope, but I'm pretty obsessed

[49:13] with carrying capacity. I do feel like this community at some point will build itself out and really

[49:20] need to focus more on quality versus quantity. I would suggest having been involved in carrying

[49:27] capacity studies in the past that that is that is very difficult to out just go those are huge

[49:34] enormous projects. And I-

[49:38] There's only so much water, there's only so much space to build. You can't just keep building

[49:45] your way out of problems like this. So maybe I am virtue signaling but when it comes to this type

[49:50] of discussion I just I want everyone to live a happy prosperous life and it won't happen if we

[49:55] keep growing to a degree that's not doesn't allow that.

[50:00] The criteria does take in consideration some of those things, such as water capacity.

[50:06] I think some of it, those the question about what's an appropriate density is not necessarily built into the criteria that I can recall, I believe that conversation was removed based on the feedback from stakeholders.

[50:18] But there will be some analysis on the water we have in capacity and phase two, since that's required in the state legislation.

[50:27] I mean, that's an easier one utility wise and yeah, I've spoken my piece, but this is necessary these grant dollars will be great

[50:36] And it sounds like we still maintain a lot of local controls, so good on you.

[50:44] Any other questions?

[50:46] Okay, thank you so much.

[50:48] Thank you.

[50:49] Thanks.

[50:52] Resolution 19 and 20, Armory Hall,

[51:11] thank you guys.

[51:13] So on resolution number 19, I requested that these two items be pulled because I would

[51:21] like to make separate motions.

[51:23] At this time, I am not in support of the change order because I, when it comes to the exterior,

[51:32] I would like to have some HPC input before we get so far down the line that the changes that they may see or request would not be incorporated.

[51:43] And I just, I know that we've said that there will be HPC review of some of the exterior through the process, but I'm just concerned that, you know, even just having their comments on what we've been presented with so far would be helpful.

[52:00] I think as we move forward, the second thing was, I still disagree with the third floor programming.

[52:12] I think it's two restaurants and two bars or one or two bars, something like that, is that right?

[52:21] Two kitchens and a primary bar.

[52:23] Two kitchens and one bar and so I'm just still concerned.

[52:27] And I think that that top floor can be used for so much and I don't know if it's going in that direction or not, so I'm just hesitant.

[52:35] If the space was to be programmed for two market rate, restaurant service, if that's kind of the vision, then I think that's going to be a bad move for the community.

[52:47] And I don't know, I don't know that this leaves in the agility and ability for

[52:56] changes to that top floor programming. So those are the reasons that I wanted to pull

[53:00] it is because I just have some questions around what this change order does, what it forwards

[53:05] in terms of design, and can we walk back from it in the future? And so I don't know if you

[53:12] want to comment to those perhaps on.

[53:16] Well, we've had a number of work sessions and the last one was in January, where we showed

[53:25] the most up-to-date concept schematic design for this proposal to get it ready for the land use application in which we did show a basement floor for community gathering space, the larger of the spaces that were designed into this program.

[53:45] the ground floor has three kitchens and I'm just talking about the primary kind of uses

[53:53] on it. Three kitchens, potential for grab and go or small retail pods, obviously places

[54:01] to lounge to dine and a small bar on that floor and the upper floor, also on the ground floor

[54:13] in addition with the visitor center in it and at the top floor being two

[54:21] kitchens and a primary bar. The intent of having the primary bar on the

[54:27] second floor is to not have as much presence of a bar on the ground floor so

[54:37] that's a little more family oriented. The mezzanine level which I didn't mention

[54:42] has a small meeting room, dining space depending on what it's needed for, and lounge area, and a game component.

[54:54] and at that work session, council seem to...

[55:01] Give the okay for submitting a land use application with that program.

[55:08] I know. Yeah. Okay. And then item number 20 was confirmation on the land use application. Sorry, let me pull that up.

[55:40] Yeah, so for the same reasons, I think that this puts into, this states and City Council has some preferences here that I disagree with.

[55:52] I do think that HBC should weigh in now instead of later, so for the same reasons, I'll just be not supporting these two tonight.

[56:04] Thank you guys.

[56:05] Questions?

[56:06] I thought you brought up an interesting point about the ability to make some changes when

[56:13] HPC weighs in, which they will.

[56:16] So I'd like to ask Todd if possible to maybe speak to that for a moment.

[56:21] How much flexibility Todd is there in the contract as you propose it and the change orders

[56:26] as you propose them to absorb some feedback and changes from HPC on, I suppose, primarily

[56:34] that exterior, I think we all know they're going to have some feedback and we want their

[56:39] feedback. It's important feedback. So, you know, what sort of realm of adjustment do you

[56:46] have built in there?

[56:47] I think that flexibility exists within this change order. You know, the nature of our contract

[56:53] is hourly to a top set. So the numbers that we're looking here were approaching is worst-case scenario.

[56:59] And to speak to an example, for instance, in Part 1, which was enhanced schematic design,

[57:06] we came in under that schematic design fee and absorbed the addition of the schematic

[57:11] design of the visitor center into that fee.

[57:14] So I think there is room to some degree depends on the magnitude of the change, of course.

[57:20] But really the nature of the facade design on Hopkins Avenue, which I think will be the

[57:25] focus of HPC feedback.

[57:27] I think relative to the scale of the work that we're doing in these upcoming phases is relatively small.

[57:33] Thanks, I'm comfortable with the proposal.

[57:37] Thanks.

[57:37] Thank you, yes.

[57:43] With that, if you allow me to make a couple of motions, are you okay with resolution 18 in the.

[57:53] Yes, so then I would just make a motion for resolution number 19.

[57:59] This is the Armory Hall Adaptive Reuse Change Order.

[58:05] Seconded.

[58:05] There's a motion and a second is there for the discussion.

[58:09] Could we have a roll call vote for resolution number 19, please?

[58:13] Councillor Doyle.

[58:14] Yes.

[58:14] Councillor Gooth.

[58:15] Yes.

[58:15] Councillor Rose.

[58:17] Yes.

[58:17] Mayor Tory.

[58:18] No.

[58:19] I'd like to make a motion for resolution number 20.

[58:22] This is confirmation of the City Council direction on Armory Hall Land Use Application.

[58:27] Seconded.

[58:28] motion a second by Bill on that.

[58:32] Any further discussion?

[58:33] Yeah, John.

[58:36] Is this the one that we want HPC to weigh on?

[58:41] You

[58:44] know, I mean, the first one, the change order is where the design work is going to be being done.

[58:51] But in resolution number 20, it has council affirmation of things like material and

[58:58] The paint changes are supported, sandstone siding, metal roof, and darker paint scheme.

[59:06] And then the Bayes 2 and 5 instead of the other 4.

[59:13] So it says that council supports the facade changes in some of the materials and color palette, perhaps, in number 20.

[59:24] So they both kind of refer to both items.

[59:30] I had a motion in a second.

[59:33] Any further discussion?

[59:35] Could we have a roll call vote for resolution number 20, please?

[59:38] Councillor Doyle.

[59:40] No.

[59:41] Councillor Gooth.

[59:42] Yes.

[59:43] Councillor Rose.

[59:44] Yes.

[59:45] Mayor Tory.

[59:46] No.

[59:51] Two to vote.

[59:52] That's a failed action.

[59:53] Correct.

[59:54] You can continue it to another meeting to have a full council if you wish.

[1:00:00] I think that's probably the best option here.

[1:00:06] That remaining vote will be a decider, so I might as well do that.

[1:00:12] I make a motion to, for continuance, I make a motion to continue resolution number 20 until February 25th.

[1:00:29] No.

[1:00:32] Is that right? February 25th.

[1:00:36] So a land use application has been submitted.

[1:00:40] That was the deadline we brought up on February 3rd with our deadline that we were targeting

[1:00:47] and we met that.

[1:00:51] So the resolution was just in terms of the direction.

[1:00:55] Right.

[1:00:56] Therefore the council has a choice to provide direction to withdraw the application.

[1:00:59] and it certainly has implications for the timing of the project if that's done.

[1:01:03] Thank you.

[1:01:06] Oh, let's see.

[1:01:08] The land use application has already been submitted and it can't sit there until the 25th.

[1:01:19] It will just build the land of the timeline because we had talked about an expedited review

[1:01:25] before the Historic Preservation Commission in April.

[1:01:30] So if it sits there, you won't make that timeline.

[1:01:35] It kind of provides maybe a little food for thought here is the direction that's outlined here is summary of majority council position on prior discussions and work sessions and meetings on these topics.

[1:01:53] Yeah.

[1:01:53] Totally respect that people may disagree with some are all of the notation in here.

[1:02:00] But we've been through all of this.

[1:02:02] I think it's accurate that the majority supported each of these things.

[1:02:11] This resolution is more formality than anything else given that we're all on the, not we're

[1:02:19] all.

[1:02:19] Well, we collectively are on the record sort of deciding on these matters and have authorized to submit all the land use application with these things in it.

[1:02:28] So I'm not opposed to continuing it and having bored way in on it, but unless someone's rethinking what they've stated previously, I don't know that we're going to have a different outcome here.

[1:02:44] Yeah, I appreciate that.

[1:02:48] I think if it's just a two-week delay or what have you, then I'm happy to have Ward here to confirm that this is what he wants to see.

[1:02:57] I don't, and I can't.

[1:03:00] John?

[1:03:00] I just want to say, having HPCY on this is really important to me.

[1:03:10] I understood what Todd Kennedy has stated, but I want HPC to have a voice in this.

[1:03:16] Yes, maybe Jen, could you discuss how HPC will be involved in this, please?

[1:03:22] So currently the process, it's a public project.

[1:03:26] It's very similar to a multi-step review process for any other type of land use application.

[1:03:32] As a public project, it's two steps.

[1:03:34] The first is a public hearing before the Historic Conservation Commission.

[1:03:39] They will be weighing in on the exterior of the Armory Hall building as well as the improvements being proposed in Connor Park, because both the building and the park are designated under the historic preservation ordinance.

[1:03:59] And so they will be making a recommendation to City Council for the application.

[1:04:06] They could be making recommendations to in total support.

[1:04:11] They could make recommendations for changes to the design, but that input will be brought back to City Council.

[1:04:20] City Council is the final decision maker on this land use application.

[1:04:25] Thanks, John.

[1:04:26] John, does that address your concern?

[1:04:28] It does.

[1:04:30] I'll make a motion to approve resolution number 20.

[1:04:37] seconded. We have a motion to second further discussion. Yeah, I'd prefer to just wait two weeks.

[1:04:43] You know, this is one of those projects that we are expediting. It is being done as quickly as

[1:04:49] possible to this point. It will move forward, but there's a risk here of community division,

[1:04:56] Greater Board Separation, lack of...

[1:05:00] So, you know, getting input, we could add HPC chime in on this very simply for our work session stuff. So, two weeks doesn't matter to me. I think that Ward would love to be here to vote on this, but you guys do what you need to do. I've said my piece. I want everybody to know that I think this project, while so much of it is going in the right direction, because it's going to be something for the community. I still have concerns and I think we need to get this right.

[1:05:29] All right. We have a motion in a second. For the discussion?

[1:05:33] Yep. I just want to say I want to get this right. I don't think two weeks is too long to wait and I would really like to have ward way in on this.

[1:05:43] Thanks. Motion in a second. No for the discussion. Could we have a roll call vote for the motion of resolution number 20?

[1:05:51] Councillor Doyle. No.

[1:05:55] Councilor Gooth.

[1:05:56] Yes.

[1:05:57] Councilor Rose.

[1:05:58] Yes.

[1:05:59] Mayor Tory.

[1:06:00] No.

[1:06:02] I would like to make a- or did I make a motion for-

[1:06:05] Yes.

[1:06:05] Continuence to the 25th?

[1:06:07] I don't think it ever got-

[1:06:08] It wasn't the second.

[1:06:09] Okay, so I'd like to make a motion to continue resolution number 20 until February 25th.

[1:06:17] Second.

[1:06:18] The motion is second for the discussion.

[1:06:19] motion. Could we have a roll call vote for continuing resolution number 22 February 25th,

[1:06:26] please? Councillor Doyle? Yes. Councillor Gooth? Yes. Councillor Rose? Yes.

[1:06:32] Mayor Tory? Yes. Thank you, guys. Thank you.

[1:06:40] For the rest of the consent calendar. Yeah, that would be great. I'll make a motion to approve the rest

[1:06:45] of the consent calendar. I'll second.

[1:06:50] For the discussion.

[1:06:51] Please. One thing I made this disclosure before, but Bart Johnson who's representing

[1:06:56] theater aspen is an attorney mine for a long, long time. I have nothing to do with this

[1:07:02] land use matter at all, but I wanted to refresh everyone on that. Thanks.

[1:07:07] Thank you. We have a motion and a second for the consent calendar. Could we have a roll call vote, please?

[1:07:15] Councilor Doyle. Yes. Councilor Gooth. Yes. Councilor Rose. Yes. Mayor Tory. Yes.

[1:07:24] Thank

[1:07:24] you all for being here tonight.

[1:07:38] This brings us to first reading of ordinances. Tonight

[1:07:40] we have ordinance number two. This is amendments to the land use code.

[1:08:14] Mayor Tory, City Council, I've got a few slides for both. First and second reading. If you

[1:08:19] are good with me, I can go ahead and share this. Thank you. For the record, Haley Hart,

[1:08:25] our Long Range Planner and Community Development.

[1:08:43] Okay, so for first reading today, this is, if you may recall, I brought this policy resolution

[1:08:50] in front of you all, either last City Council or the session before.

[1:08:55] This is for ordinance number two, and we're just grouping two unrelated land use code updates

[1:09:01] into this one ordinance.

[1:09:04] The two Land Use Code amendments in front of you today is Proposition 122 Response, which was initiated by City Council via a work session that Louisa brought forward back in November.

[1:09:17] The second land use code was initiated by the Planning and Zoning Commission to change their meeting date from Tuesday to Wednesday.

[1:09:28] And that was initiated back in December and they passed a resolution for that in January.

[1:09:35] So I'm just going to dive into both of these topics a little bit more.

[1:09:40] So, we'll start with Proposition 122, as you may recall, this is the Natural Medicine

[1:09:46] Business Amendment, and City Council gave direction to staff to include it as an office

[1:09:54] use category within the land use code under our use category section.

[1:10:00] And then subsequently we also are including some definitions that are verbated from the state legislation into our definitions just to sort of bolster the use category addition.

[1:10:15] So we've got three definitions that we are proposing to be included. Again, these are verbatim from the state. The first one is natural medicine. So just defining what the substance is. And again, this is all regulated through a state license.

[1:10:31] So this is including the psilocybin, and I don't know how to say some of these other words,

[1:10:39] but those are the other three substances as well.

[1:10:50] And then natural medicine products, so again, this is just further defining what those four substances are

[1:10:56] that are include within the medicine business.

[1:10:59] And then the natural medicine business itself, which again is what we are going to be regulating through the time place and manner through this code change.

[1:11:13] So again, we're including it as a red line just within the office use category which already has medical offices and medical marijuana offices as part of that category within the use section.

[1:11:28] These are the zone districts that will allow it in your packet.

[1:11:33] I also provided some GIS maps just showing where exactly that is.

[1:11:38] As you may recall, there is already a state statute for having the 1000 foot buffer from any sort of daycares, pre-schools, elementary schools, such as.

[1:11:49] And so this is just a GIS map overlay of what the zone districts are in addition to the 1000 foot buffer radius.

[1:11:56] And then we just have a closer one into the core as this is where the office use is allowed.

[1:12:04] So again, just highlighting where anyone will be able to obtain a natural business or

[1:12:11] natural medicine business license from the state.

[1:12:15] And then when they come to get their license through the city, this is where we will be checking for allowance of use.

[1:12:29] I'm happy to answer questions on this or I can go through the meeting date change request.

[1:12:34] We can do combined questions, but I did want to give you a chance to ask questions on that just as there are two unrelated topics.

[1:12:43] Hayley, can you refresh me?

[1:12:44] I think at the first presentation, we learned that in the current state statute,

[1:12:53] you cannot charge for those natural medicines.

[1:12:56] You can only charge for the therapy that goes along with the natural medicines?

[1:12:59] Yes, that is correct.

[1:13:01] Yes.

[1:13:01] And the medicine is allowed to be consumed off-premises.

[1:13:06] I think that it is allowed to be consumed within the business.

[1:13:11] I think the business is where you can receive it, but I don't know if there is any

[1:13:16] verbiage on where it can be consumed.

[1:13:19] But my understanding was that the granting of it was within this office use.

[1:13:25] It's great.

[1:13:26] There's also some provisions in state code that I don't think are applicable to this conversation about personal use of these substances, sort of unrelated to the business activity.

[1:13:37] And Louisa regretted that she couldn't be here tonight and she's really the one that's like dug into the legislation, so she said she'll be available for second reading if you'd like, we can bring that question back.

[1:13:48] You're doing a fine job, Haley. Thanks. No need to apologize.

[1:13:53] I think I said this the first time.

[1:13:57] And I don't know how long this will take to shake out, but, you know, the way that this manifests

[1:14:06] and gets implemented is going to be different than what people thought about in the state statute.

[1:14:12] We talked about like you that you pay for the therapy session and get the medicine, you know, the therapy session last 10 seconds or whatever.

[1:14:24] I

[1:14:27] don't have an opinion on this, but I do think that it's worth sort of acknowledging that this is coming in front of us and it's going to have some kind of impact on the community.

[1:14:36] I don't, given that it states that, and we can't really contradict it, I don't know if there's much for us to do about it in the context of this conversation and this approval, but I am thinking about it, and my anticipation is that some are all of it will, the rate.

[1:15:00] The situation will get loosened over time, similar to what we saw happen with cannabis.

[1:15:07] Anyway, I just thought it was worth mentioning for people to start thinking about. Are you general concerns? I'm not sure I'm so concerned. I mean, some of this stuff that was, that's part of this is pretty heavy duty. The DMT is this medicine

[1:15:29] derived from a sonoran desert toad or something like that. This is like heavy-duty psychedelic stuff.

[1:15:38] You know, if it's being, there's tons of research coming out and still active on how

[1:15:43] wonderful the benefits are for all sorts of reasons. But there's also the recreational side of it.

[1:15:49] And you know,

[1:15:54] there's always overuse of the recreational side of things.

[1:16:03] And there's some concerns there.

[1:16:06] Again, we can't really do anything about that because this is the state statute.

[1:16:10] But I just think we need to be mindful of it and

[1:16:12] perhaps be providing some feedback to the state as this rolls out and be prepared for

[1:16:18] that.

[1:16:23] I don't like, I think that this is like set up.

[1:16:26] I think ultimately my point and my biggest concern is this is set up to be like a very

[1:16:30] a great market situation where this is not really like truth therapy being administered.

[1:16:35] It's following the letters of the law to provide recreational use of these medicines.

[1:16:44] And I don't like that.

[1:16:46] I never liked the medicinal marijuana thing.

[1:16:48] I just thought we should have done recreational marijuana with good education and

[1:16:52] good regulation from the beginning.

[1:16:54] If we're accepting of what this product is then just be accepting of it.

[1:16:59] So that's my personal standpoint, but we don't get an opportunity to weigh in on that here.

[1:17:05] I think we should just be prepared for what's to come.

[1:17:14] Any other questions?

[1:17:16] Thank you for your motion.

[1:17:18] Or she still has to talk about the second piece, I think.

[1:17:22] We're done with this.

[1:17:24] Okay.

[1:17:24] Yeah.

[1:17:25] Prop 20, 20, 20, 20.

[1:17:26] Okay, we'll move on to the PNZ meeting date change request.

[1:17:30] Again, this came out of Planning and Zoning Commission, which they have the right per Title

[1:17:37] 26 to initiate an amendment.

[1:17:39] And so PNZ gave staff direction to initiate that change from having their meetings on

[1:17:44] the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month to the 1st and 3rd Wednesday of the month.

[1:17:50] And I provided the memo just some topics of conversation that we had with the Planning and

[1:17:55] zoning commission, when we brought this, and again, they have to approve a resolution

[1:18:00] in order for it to sort of come in front of you all, and they were looking really to

[1:18:07] change their date because they want use of pearl pass right now, or sorry, city council

[1:18:13] chambers, right now we're in pearl pass, and it can feel a little cramped, and it's not

[1:18:18] like a super great space to hold public events, and we have a lot of individuals who want to

[1:18:24] comment or if there's large teams that are involved for presentations, I think the City Council

[1:18:31] Chambers is just a more effective space for the public and efficiency of the meeting when it

[1:18:37] especially comes to larger meetings, which I think PNZ is really seen and uptick in recently.

[1:18:44] And then additionally, pro pass isn't available due to the election and they were just sort of reflecting

[1:18:49] that, you know, every two years this will sort of be the cycle of us having to switch around the rooms.

[1:18:55] So it just sort of creates greater ease moving forward with this conflict with the election cycle.

[1:19:02] Additionally, in December, you know, City Council, y'all had changed door meetings.

[1:19:07] And so they were conflicting with P&Z meetings just because of the holiday schedule which is completely understandable.

[1:19:12] But I do think that P&Z again is just hoping to sort of ease any conflict with y'all schedule.

[1:19:19] especially around holidays.

[1:19:22] And then lastly, the 1st and 3rd Wednesday just compliments HPC there on the 2nd and 4th Wednesday of the month.

[1:19:29] So it's just a nice compliment to the HPC at this time.

[1:19:39] Questions for second reading.

[1:19:40] Yeah, and we can talk about PNZ specifically if we need to, but.

[1:19:43] Yeah, my question would be about PNZ.

[1:19:45] PNZ members, does this disqualify any, have you heard from any PNZ members that are like, oh, I can't do that date change?

[1:19:52] No.

[1:19:53] Not yet.

[1:19:54] And Teresa McGovern, who's the chair, confirmed that it worked for her.

[1:19:59] So.

[1:20:01] We'll see. Any other questions for second reading? Okay.

[1:20:09] Thank you very much. A motion. Make a motion to approve ordinance two, series of 2025 amendments. To read. To read, please. Oh, sorry. I'll make a motion to read ordinance number two. Second. Motion to second for the discussion. Can we have a roll call for reading of ordinance two? Councillor Doyle. Yes. Councillor Kuth. Yes. Councillor Rose. Yes. Councillor Mayor Tory.

[1:20:36] Yes.

[1:20:37] Ordnance 2 series of 2025 in ordinance of the Aspen City Council amending City of Aspen

[1:20:44] Land Use Code sections 26.104.100 definitions 26.104.110 use categories and 26.212.060 meetings

[1:21:01] hearings and procedure, as necessary for coordination related to a City Council directed

[1:21:07] response to Colorado, Senate Bill, 23-290, Proposition 122, and a request by the Planning

[1:21:16] and Zoning Commission to change the monthly meeting date.

[1:21:27] Motion?

[1:21:28] I'll make the motion to approve the ordinance number two.

[1:21:30] Seconded.

[1:21:31] Motion, second for the discussion.

[1:21:32] Can we have a roll call vote for ordinance number two, please?

[1:21:35] Councillor Doyle?

[1:21:36] Yes.

[1:21:37] Councillor Gooth.

[1:21:38] Yes. Councillor Rose. Yes.

[1:21:40] Mayor Tory. Yes. Thank you.

[1:21:45] This brings us to our public hearings ordinance number one, annual update to the fee and

[1:21:49] loot rate schedule.

[1:22:09] You ready?

[1:22:12] So for ordinance number one, this is

[1:22:15] the second reading of the annual fee and loot update. Again, this is an annual update that

[1:22:22] happens based on the National Construction Cost Index provided by ENR or the engineering

[1:22:28] news record, which is just a 1.6% increase this year over last January. As a reminder,

[1:22:37] this does get updated per code every five years, which we discussed at first reading.

[1:22:46] So again, this is just an index increase. You can see from January 2024, which was our

[1:22:51] last increase to this past month of January. Again, it was a 1.6% increase. And again,

[1:22:59] and this is based on national numbers.

[1:23:03] And I wanted to just sort of respond again

[1:23:06] to the inputs for the model

[1:23:09] that has created our fee and loo per FTE.

[1:23:12] So again, this is the sum of the cost

[1:23:16] of components per square foot,

[1:23:18] which have multiple sort of inputs there in the blue.

[1:23:23] This is multiplied by the demand factor of 400 square feet

[1:23:27] per FTE, that is codified in Title 26 within our GMQS chapter.

[1:23:33] And then minus the revenues that the unit is for sale or for rent from the total cost.

[1:23:40] So that is the current model.

[1:23:41] Again, this is something that we will be looking at seeing if there's better inputs or better

[1:23:48] numbers or just a different model that we might want to look at in the coming years.

[1:23:54] And

[1:23:57] I just wanted to provide a sort of summary of what the 2021 fee-in-loo cost was.

[1:24:03] So that was what was passed after the Phase II study report was finalized.

[1:24:08] So this was the sort of update fee-in-loo from our previous iteration and previous model last years.

[1:24:16] And then what we are proposing this year.

[1:24:18] And this is, again, the cost for the affordable housing mitigation based on the category.

[1:24:24] As a reminder, Category 2 is for residential, Category 4 mitigation is for lodging and commercial.

[1:24:36] And then just another way to look at it, this is the price per square foot.

[1:24:40] So again, this is a 14.5% increase since that new methodology took place in 2021.

[1:24:47] And that represents $160 per square foot increase from 2021 to the 2025 fee and

[1:24:54] And

[1:24:59] again,

[1:25:00] And we are going to conduct outreach for consultant support starting this summer to update that methodology and look at what the model inputs are as it's written within Title 26.

[1:25:16] Okay. Any questions? Questions, council members?

[1:25:25] This is a public hearing on ordinance number one. This is the annual update to the fee and lee rate soldier and members of the public to wish to comment this evening. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to council table.

[1:25:41] Second. Motion is second. Is there any further discussion?

[1:25:46] Seeing none, can we have a roll call vote for ordinance number one, please.

[1:25:51] Councillor Doyle. Yes. Councillor Gooth. Yes.

[1:25:54] Councillor Rose. Yes. Mayor Tory. I am a yes. All right.

[1:26:00] Wonderful. Thank you so much, Haley. Thank you.

[1:26:03] Thanks, Ben. Great job.

[1:26:07] Thanks, guys.

[1:26:08] All right, this brings us down to our action items this evening.

[1:26:12] Speaking of seconds.

[1:26:14] There's your DMT.

[1:26:16] There's your DMT.

[1:26:17] Paul Lee.

[1:26:20] So for our action items tonight we have board and commission appointments.

[1:26:23] We just went through some interviews and we are going to go around and vote on some preferences

[1:26:31] for appointments.

[1:26:33] Again, this is unfortunate not to have ward here but we'll see if maybe there is

[1:26:38] is some consensus among the four of us.

[1:26:43] I'll start with HPC.

[1:26:45] HPC is in need of two regular members and two alternate members.

[1:26:49] And we have two applicants total.

[1:26:52] Jody's surface is reapplying, and Duncan Claus has expressed his interest in HPC.

[1:26:58] By a simple raise of a hand, can I see who is supportive of Jody's surface?

[1:27:04] And then for a regular position, for a regular?

[1:27:06] Yes.

[1:27:07] And then, can you do that verbally as well, then?

[1:27:10] Do you need it verbally?

[1:27:12] Well, I didn't hear the question.

[1:27:14] We're just going through person-by-person to see.

[1:27:19] But eventually, you're going to pass a motion to a point of various people, all right?

[1:27:24] We, yeah, I would do it, I could do it all in one motion or I could do it by board.

[1:27:30] It's up to you, but you need a motion with defining or setting forth who you are pointing.

[1:27:34] Okay, then we will do that at the end.

[1:27:39] So, Jody service for regular, and then Duncan-Claus for regular member?

[1:27:51] This brings us to open space, two regular openings with two members reapplying.

[1:27:58] We have Dan Pearl, who was able to meet with us virtually, is there support for

[1:28:05] re-appointing Dan Pearl.

[1:28:13] Is there support for Ted Mann?

[1:28:23] I'll just keep asking just so that we have the opportunity. Carl Adam and Jeff Novak. Excellent.

[1:28:31] Yeah, you know, I mean this is, I totally get it, you know, and board turnover and stuff.

[1:28:36] Dan and Ted are both excellent. Carl and Jeff are wonderful people.

[1:28:42] It's one of those tough questions so I understand.

[1:28:45] We have got the LLA, the LLA is in need of two regular members with one alternate opening.

[1:28:54] We have one person reapplying for his seat that is Chris Benden.

[1:29:00] So Chris Benden is reapplying for a regular seat, is there support for Chris Benden?

[1:29:07] Then

[1:29:12] we had Christine Romello for

[1:29:18] regular,

[1:29:24] then we had Michael Woodrow and if those are your regular choices, those are the two regular seats, so now we are looking for one alternate opening, is there support for Michael Woodrow?

[1:29:38] He was great on virtual, I like to his answers.

[1:29:44] Francis Stuckins. I have enjoyed how Francis has been involved in coming to Council.

[1:29:53] Linda Manning and

[1:29:58] Hunter Galvin.

[1:30:03] We did not have a majority.

[1:30:08] Okay, so we will hold off on the alternate appointment, and maybe bring that back when ward is with us.

[1:30:19] We have got the Wheeler, and once again, I'll say the same thing. I mean, great applicants, and you said it at the meeting itself. You were like, man, we haven't had this many for one board, much less.

[1:30:32] all of them so great applicants I want to encourage all of them to continue to

[1:30:37] apply if they didn't get appointed tonight. The Wheeler Opera House, three

[1:30:41] regular and one alternate. We have one reapplication and that's Amy Mount Joy.

[1:30:48] Let's start with her. Is there support for reappointing Amy Mount Joy?

[1:30:58] Amy Sheber for a

[1:31:01] regular position.

[1:31:07] Bob Eflin for a regular position.

[1:31:16] Yeah, Bob was great. Let's see.

[1:31:20] Bob was great.

[1:31:25] I'm going to withhold. Let's see. Jordan Redner. Jordan was

[1:31:30] virtual with us.

[1:31:35] Brian Weingarten.

[1:31:41] Sarah Peltch. I

[1:31:55] think Sarah what was her

[1:31:57] background. She represented that like a yo-yo mom and stuff. Classical music booker. Right,

[1:32:03] we're right. We're right. Very. We'd be so lucky to have this. She knew and she didn't really have

[1:32:10] that much conflict, right? No, I was asked. Okay, I'll raise a hand for Sarah. I'll raise a hand

[1:32:18] for Sarah.

[1:32:23] Charles Cuniff.

[1:32:28] You can keep voting if they weren't. You can keep voting.

[1:32:31] Okay, so we got two regulars so far, and that brings us back to

[1:32:41] Amy Sheeber, Bob Eflin,

[1:32:47] Charles Cuniff, Jordan and Brian.

[1:32:50] Damien Johnstere and Noel Halloway didn't interview him, right?

[1:32:57] Okay. Okay. All right. So let's just go through them again.

[1:33:04] I'll start at the top. Amy Shieber.

[1:33:07] Yeah. I vote for Bob Eflin.

[1:33:15] There's three. They're all really great. Okay. And now let's go

[1:33:21] through for an alternate opening. Amy Shieber for an alternate

[1:33:29] Jordan Redner for alternate Brian

[1:33:34] And Ryan Garten, really lucky to have Brian, super smart day, he does.

[1:33:41] All right, there you go.

[1:33:45] With that, and once again, I'll say the same thing for everybody that applies.

[1:33:50] So thankful to have you apply highly qualified individuals.

[1:33:56] I would make a motion to appoint Jody Service and

[1:34:02] Duncan Claus to the HPC for regular positions.

[1:34:08] Dan Pearl and Ted Mann to the Open Space Board to the two regular positions.

[1:34:16] Chris Benden and Christine Ramello to the LLA regular seats.

[1:34:28] And Amy Mountjoy, Sarah Peltch, Bob Eflin as to the Wheeler Board as regular members,

[1:34:39] and Brian Weingarten for the alternate opening.

[1:34:44] Second.

[1:34:46] Sorry, can I?

[1:34:48] We went through it again for Wheeler.

[1:34:50] I was running LLA.

[1:34:52] I would raise hand to sport for Michael Woodrow.

[1:34:55] If there's a majority there for the alternate,

[1:34:58] I think there might have been two.

[1:34:59] And I think

[1:35:00] Raise my hand. If there's any reconsideration, otherwise I'm fine moving forward. Yeah, I appreciate it. I'm going to go ahead and since it's an alternate position, I'm going to go ahead and get warden. No worries. Then onward.

[1:35:17] We have a motion and a second for the discussion.

[1:35:23] Can we please have a roll call vote for the board and commission appointments?

[1:35:29] Councillor Doyle. Yes. Councillor Gooth. Yes.

[1:35:33] Councillor Rose. Yes. Mayor Tory. Yes. Thank you, guys. All right.

[1:35:39] Jim.

[1:35:44] Mr. Mayor, Council is actually requesting an opportunity to go into executive session. It's

[1:35:50] going to CRS section 24 or 6402 for B. Conference is with Attorney for the local public body for

[1:35:59] or E, determining positions relative to matters that may be subject negotiations, and for F personnel, specific item of discussion involves the following city manager review and contract discussions.

[1:36:13] If Council moves to go into executive session, the executive session will be recorded, and the recording will be maintained by the clerk for a period of not less than 90 days.

[1:36:23] As usual, the executive session will be performed down in the electric pass room for the council.

[1:36:34] And we will not return to this room to return the meeting.

[1:36:41] I'll make a motion to go into executive session.

[1:36:43] Seconded.

[1:36:43] Motion to second for the discussion.

[1:36:46] Can we have a roll call vote for going into executive session, please?

[1:36:48] Councillor Doyle.

[1:36:49] Yes.

[1:36:50] Councillor Gooth.

[1:36:50] Yes.

[1:36:51] Councillor Rose.

[1:36:52] Yes.

[1:36:52] Mayor Tory. Yes. Thank you as always to grassroots. Have a wonderful evening. We will see you in two weeks, I suspect. Have a wonderful President's Day weekend, next weekend.

[1:37:09] Recording stuff.

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

Transcript